< 


BV  772  . V4  1923 

Versteeg,  John  Marinus,  188$ 

The  deeper  meaning  of 

ef  Awarrlshi  n 


I 

Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


https://archive.org/details/deepermeaningofs00vers_0 


.* 


BY  THE  SAME  AUTHOR 

THE  MODERN  MEANING  OF  CHURCH 
MEMBERSHIP 


The  Deeper  Meaning 
of  Stewardship 

BY 

JOHN  M.  VERSTEEG 


THE  ABINGDON  PRESS 
NEW  YORK  CINCINNATI 


Copyright,  192$,  by 

JOHN  M.  VERSTEEG 


Printed  in  the  United  States  of  America 


DEDICATED  TO 
MR.  JACOB  RIBBE 


' 


. 


1 


' 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

Foreword .  9 

I  Stewardship  Claims .  13 

II  The  Foundations  of  Stewardship .  27 

III  Social  Christians .  49 

IV  The  Tithe  and  Stewardship .  63 

V  Stewardship  and  Property .  85 

VI  Creative  Ownership .  107 

VII  Acquisitive  Ownership .  121 

VIII  The  Wider  Stewardship .  151 

IX  The  Stewardship  of  the  Church .  167 

X  Teaching  Stewardship .  183 

XI  A  Stewardship  Reverie .  197 

Appendix .  209 

Bibliography .  217 


FOREWORD 

Stewardship,  always  a  part  of  the  Chris¬ 
tian  faith,  is  receiving  fresh  attention.  The 
church  aroused  large  interest  in  it  for  the  sake 
of  its  world- wide  needs.  Increasing  treat¬ 
ment  is  accorded  it  in  the  pulpit  and  the  press. 
It  is  getting  into  the  thought  of  the  man  on 
the  street.  This  is  a  wonderful  thing  that  is 
coming  to  pass  in  our  midst.  Stewardship  is 
converting  our  collective  concepts.  The  word 
of  the  social  gospel  is  made  flesh  by  it.  This 
revival  of  stewardship  spells  the  survival  of 
our  faith.  Future  generations  will  arise  to 
call  us  blessed  for  taking  it  to  heart. 

Our  defeats  lie  closest  to  our  victories.  In 
some  quarters  a  one-sided  emphasis  came  to 
prevail.  Stewardship  came  to  be  taught  for 
the  expansion  of  our  work  rather  than  as  the 
expression  of  our  life.  The  stewardship  depart¬ 
ments  in  the  various  denominational  campaigns 
were  given  a  difficult  task.  They  were  expected, 

within  limited  periods,  so  to  emphasize  stew- 

9 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


ardsliip  principles  that  massive  amounts  could 
be  raised.  What  wonder  that  when  time  was 
lacking  for  the  former,  only  those  phases  were 
stressed  that  were  sure  to  accelerate  giving? 
Hence  the  tithe  was  exalted  out  of  all  propor¬ 
tion  to  the  subject  itself.  Now  we  are  able 
to  see  that  this  haste  caused  waste  both  of 
forces,  friends,  and  funds.  The  church  must 
teach  stewardship,  not  to  protect  itself,  but 
to  save  the  world.  It  would  be  an  unspeak¬ 
able  blunder  were  Protestantism  to  permit  so 
basic  a  subject  as  this  to  be  brought  into 
discredit  by  those  who  seize  upon  it  as  a  quick 
road  to  finance. 

Stewardship  is  worthy  of  our  thought,  even 
though  much  that  goes  by  its  name  may  be 
unworthy  of  it.  Indeed,  much  of  the  subject 
has  not  yet  been  thought  through,  which  is 
another  way  of  saying  that  much  of  this  sub¬ 
ject  may  have  to  be  thought  over.  Ex  cathedra 
deliverances  concerning  it  abound,  but  they 
are  not  rooted  in  reason;  there  is  no  heart 
in  them.  It  is  open-minded  study  of  steward¬ 
ship  of  which  the  church  stands  in  need.  No 
blunder  should  be  permitted  to  blind  us  to 
the  splendor  of  this  movement.  It  is  cap¬ 
turing  the  Christian  conscience  in  amazing 

10 


FOREWORD 


fashion.  Stewardship  now  stands  revealed  as 
one  of  the  sturdy  truths  first  in  the  mind  of 
Christ.  To  its  massive  and  mastering  impli¬ 
cations  his  followers  are  responding.  We  need 
but  to  widen  its  meaning  to  have  it  pervade 
their  lives. 

These  chapters  are  an  attempt  to  embody 
these  deeper  aspects.  Many  items  here  dis¬ 
cussed  have  elsewhere  been  finely  dealt  with. 
But  there  are  certain  phases,  social  and  psy¬ 
chological,  as  well  as  spiritual,  that  have  not 
heretofore  been  marshaled  under  the  heading 
of  stewardship.  These  chapters  doubtless  fall 
short  of  a  thorough  treatment.  Much  will 
remain  unsaid.  But  if  he  can  move  some  reader 
toward  greater  stewardship,  the  writer  will  at 
least  have  furthered  the  cause  of  the  Lord  he 
serves. 

Special  attention  is  called  to  the  Appendix, 
where  the  voice  of  scholarship  speaks  in  refer¬ 
ence  to  the  tithe. 

J.  M.  V. 

Jersey  City,  New  Jersey. 


11 


“Do  men  gather  grapes  from  thorns  or  figs  from 
thistles?  No, 

every  good  tree  bears  sound  fruit, 

but  a  rotten  tree  bears  bad  fruit; 

a  good  tree  cannot  bear  bad  fruit, 

and  a  rotten  tree  cannot  bear  sound  fruit. 

So  you  will  know  them  by  their  fruit.  Any  tree 
that  does  not  produce  sound  fruit  will  be  cut  down 
and  thrown  into  the  fire. 

“It  is  not  everyone  who  says  to  me,  ‘Lord,  Lord !’ 
who  will  get  into  the  Realm  of  heaven,  but  he  who 
does  the  will  of  my  Father  in  heaven.  Many  will 
say  to  me  at  that  Day,  ‘Lord,  Lord,  did  we  not 
prophesy  in  your  name?  did  we  not  cast  out  demons 
in  your  name?  did  we  not  perform  many  miracles 
in  your  name?’  Then  I  will  declare  to  them,  ‘I 
never  knew  you;  depart  from  my  presence ,  you 
workers  of  iniquity .*  ”■ — Jesus. 

“The  Gospel  contemplates  .  .  .  bettering  human 
society.  It  appeals  to  the  sympathy  and  con¬ 
science  of  the  individual,  bidding  him  love  his 
neighbor  as  himself,  and,  since  he  is  bound  to 
rejoice  in  his  neighbor’s  happiness  equally  with  his 
own,  to  treat  the  neighbor,  not  as  a  competitor, 
but  as  a  partner  or  a  brother,  giving  him  freely  all 
he  needs.  .  .  .  Yet  Christianity  .  .  .  has  never  been 
applied  in  practice.”1 — James  Bryce. 

1  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company  from  Modern 
Democracies ,  by  James  Bryce. 


12 


CHAPTER  I 

STEWARDSHIP  CLAIMS 

Language  is  not  an  infallible  means  of 
conveying  ideas.  We  sometimes  overwork  our 
terms.  The  temptation  to  do  so  is  especially 
strong  when  we  deal  with  elastic  words.  There 
is  a  mental  glee  that  comes  in  putting  words 
through  spiritual  gymnastics,  as  most  of  those 
given  to  speaking  are  able  to  testify.  When 
our  leaders  saw  some  years  ago  that  money- 
drives  were  necessary  if  the  church  were  to 
meet  postwar  needs,  they  fell  upon  the  word 
“stewardship”  with  avidity.  Here  was  a  word 
that  could  lend  itself  to  any  enterprise!  They 
worked  it  for  all  it  was  worth.  In  every  major 
appeal  it  was  given  prominence.  Talk  was 
made  of  the  stewardship  of  prayer,  the  steward¬ 
ship  of  time,  the  stewardship  of  money,  the 
stewardship  of  life.  And  this  use  of  the  word, 
it  must  be  confessed,  was  wholly  legitimate. 

We  are  stewards  of  manifold  mercies.  All  of 

13 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


life  is  an  intrustment.  But  it  was  not  wholly 
wise.  A  word  may  stand  for  so  much  that 
it  does  not  stand  for  enough.  It  is  best  to 
employ  those  terms  that  most  clearly  con¬ 
form  to  life.  In  the  speech  of  every  day  stew¬ 
ardship  means  the  management  of  another’s 
property.  Stewardship  is  trusteeship.1  A 
trustee  administers  buildings  or  funds.  When 
stewardship  is  mentioned  people  at  once  think 
of  money.  This  is  as  it  should  be.  We  dare 
not  forget  life-service,  or  time-investment,  or 
worship,  and  we  should  seek  for  terms  to 
express  these  properly.  But  let  us  reserve  the 
word  “stewardship”  for  that  which  it  best 
fits.  Let  it  be  applied  to  possessions,  to  the 
things  which  we  call  ours.  It  is  in  this  sense 
that  the  word  will  be  used  in  this  book. 

Stewardship  comes  to  say  that  we  need  to 
rethink  our  religion.  There  are  not  many 
claims  one  may  deem  more  momentous  than 
this.  Stewardship  is  not  so  simple  as  some 
folks  seem  to  think.  Great  truths  cannot  be 
compressed  into  epigrams.  They  overrun  the 
banks  of  brilliant  brevity.  To  give  steward¬ 
ship  a  pious  name  or  to  clothe  it  in  pungent 
phrase  is  not  to  tell  all  of  its  story.  Steward- 


1  It  is  more;  but  surely  this. 


14 


STEWARDSHIP  CLAIMS 


ship  is  frequently  mentioned  in  connection 
with  tithing.  We  shall  later  attempt  to  see 
whether  this  is  fair.  Just  now  let  us  merely 
notice  how  really  easy  that  is.  It  does  not 

require  much  thinking.  The  tithe  is  pre- 

-  - 

determined — ten  per  cent  for  the  Lord  and 
you  are  through  with  it.  You  know  just 
where  you  are  at.  If  stewardship  simply  meant 
the  payment  of  a  set  proportion,  it  might 
require  emotion,  but  would  call  forth  little 
thought.  But  since  it  involves  the  governance 
of  our  property,  and  of  all  property,  we  are 
forced  to  think  a  bit.  For  property  to-day  is 
exceedingly  complicated.  And  stewardship 
holds  thaty  property  must  do  the  will  of  God/ 
One  might  become  a  tither  from  sentimentalism . 
The  pomp  and  circumstance  of  drives  might 
sway  one  emotionally.  But  one  becomes  a 
steward  only  from  sentiment.  However  deep 
the  feeling,  it  is  always  attached  to  high 
thinking.  Stewardship  is  synonymous  with 
Christian  thoughtfulness?! 

Stewardship  calls  upon  us  to  set  up  better 
standards.  For  although  it  is  a  belief,  it  is 
most  of  all  a  practice.  One  must  not  simply 
agree  with  but  to  its  truth.  Most  men  are  not 

alive  to  the  need  for  a  change  in  standards. 

15 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 

Their  conduct  accords  with  prevalent  con¬ 
ventions.  They  are  well  satisfied  if  they  live 
up  to  the  rules  and  regulations  of  the  society 
into  which  they  were  born.  They  do  not  con¬ 
sider  it  an  obligation  to  examine  the  principles 
or  standards  of  the  social  order  into  which  they 
came.  Plato  opined  that  the  unexamined  life 
is  intolerable  for  a  human  being.  He  ought 
to  live  now!  What  multitudes  he  would  find 
in  the  “cow-paths  of  the  mind,”  what  hordes 
journeying  in  the  grooves  which  the  past  pro¬ 
duced!  But  it  is  different  with  a  steward. 
He  look$  into  things  and  his  valor  follows  his 
vision.  Knowing  that  persons  are  God’s  ulti¬ 
mate  concern,  he  endeavors  to  bring  all  things 
into  subjection  to  the  passion  of  his  Lor^E 
He  values  property  for  what  it  can  do  for 
persons.  He  sees,  as  did  Aristotle,  that  prop¬ 
erty  must  be  the  instrument  of  the  best  and 
highest  life.  Things  to  him  are  ever  the 
scaffolding  for  personality.  He  puts  conscience 
into  his  cash.  It  is  alleged  that  no  country 
is  more  thoroughly  the  victim  of  the  “mob- 
mind”  than  this  fair  land  of  ours.  The  steward 
is  an  honorable  exception.  He  does  not  “follow 
the  crowd  in  evildoing”  with  his  possessions.  He 

has  broken  the  habit  of  acquisition.  He  thinks 

16 


STEWARDSHIP  CLAIMS 


of  business  in  “unbusinesslike”  terms;  he  is 
acclimated  to  the  vocabulary  of  Christ.  Though 
life  may  often  have  to  be  compromise,  it  never 
for  him  spells  surrender  of  the  principle  he 
holds.  He  offers  Mammon  no  libations;  he 
makes  gold  the  servant  of  God.  Nor  is  it 
simply  a  question  of  the  adjustment  of  this 
principle  to  his  circle  of  activities.  It  means 
the  changing  of  the  environment  itself  by  way 
of  this  practice  into  the  realm  of  God.  This 
will  not  be  accomplished  by  pious  but  thought¬ 
less  folks,  nor  by  the  reticent  and  cringing. 
If  anyone  is  a  candidate  for  volitional  ventures, 
stewardship  offers  him  unexcelled  opportu¬ 
nities.  To  secure  a  social  order  in  which  the 
will  of  God  is  done  is  a  lifelong  task  in  which 
one  must  practice  to  preach.  It  is  not  done 
by  counting  so  many  dollars  per  week  into 
one’s  tithing  box,  though  this  too  may  well 
be  done.  It  is  only  done  by  unfaltering  alle¬ 
giance  to  one’s  trusteeship.  Stewardship  is 
not  an  issue  to  be  accepted  or  rejected  at 
one’s  leisure.  Its  rejection,  to  use  common 
speech,  means  to  turn  Christ  down.  A  verdict 
in  its  favor  is  a  triumph  for  Christ’s  cause. 

And  stewardship  exacts  enthusiasm .  To  enlist 

one’s  property  in  the  service  of  the  best  is 

17 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


to  sense  the  joy  of  deliberate  saviourhood. 
One  gets  the  sense  of  values  that  gladdened 
Jesus’  life.  One  has  an  unobscured  vision  of 
the  spiritual.  The  dollar  is  not  in  the  way. 
One  appreciates  souls.  Aggressive  humility 
comes.  A  steward  does  not  make  his  boast 
in  his  property.  He  makes  his  boast  in  the 
Lord.  He  prays:  “Lord,  what  wouldst  thou 
have  me  to  do  with  thine  own?”  And  he  hurls 
his  life  after  this  prayer  with  the  abandon  of 
a  soul  who  is  at  home  in  God.  He  does  not, 
like  the  old  mammy,  put  a  tear  in  the  collec¬ 
tion  basket.  He  concretes  his  sympathy.  The 
man  who  organizes  his  emotions  around  stew¬ 
ardship  builds  his  life  on  love. 

If  stewardship  makes  claims  upon  you,  it 
also  makes  claims  for  itself.  Stewardship 
believes  itself  possessed  of  vision.  The  steward 
sees  the  acquisitive  ambition  at  the  throat 
of  the  spiritual  life.  He  senses  that  a  world 
enslaved  by  selfishness  can  never  crown  Christ 
Lord.  He  sees  the  situation  as  it  actually  is. 
Statistics  showing  that  only  fourteen  per  cent 
of  the  incomes  in  the  United  States  are  over 
$2,000  per  year,2  that  the  vast  bulk  of  the 

s  Compare  figures  quoted  by  Mr.  Basil  Manly  before  the  Evanston 
Conference  on  “Christianity  and  the  Economic  Order.” 

18 


STEWARDSHIP  CLAIMS 


wealth  is  in  the  hands  of  a  few  or  in  their 
control,  corroborate  his  conviction.  But  he 
would  know  it  were  no  statistics  available. 
He  would  know,  from  his  human  contacts, 
how  crushingly  the  hand  of  economic  pressure 
bears  down  upon  people,  and  the  consequences 
in  mental,  social,  and  spiritual  stolidity.  The 
steward  exalts  the  spiritual  above  and  through 
the  material.  Stewardship  is  not  a  new  thing 
that  has  come  to  pass  on  the  earth.  It  is  an 
ancient  and  basic  truth  with  a  new  emphasis. 
It  comes  to  say  that  the  deceitfulness  of  riches 
chokes  out  spiritual  life.  The  struggle  for 
existence  prevents  many  people  from  follow¬ 
ing  after  life.  The  steward  sees  the  solution. 
Life  must  not  be  a  worry;  it  must  be  a  joy. 
It  is  his  conviction  that  to  own  is  to  owe,  to 
live  is  to  give,  to  love  is  to  lift.  \  It  is  a  tre¬ 
mendous  portent  that  so  many  count  them¬ 
selves  honored  to  be  stewards  for  the  Lord. 
We  shall  not  have  done  with  the  loathsome 
diseases  that  paralyze  the  race  until  our  sense 
of  trusteeship  embraces  the  physical.  We 
shall  not  Christianize  humanity  at  its  base — 
the  only  place  where  it  can  finally  and  effec¬ 
tively  hope  to  be  Christianized — until  the 

trusteeship  of  parenthood  is  given  cognizance. 

19 


BEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


In  short,  the  steward  sees  the  solution  for  all 
our  problems  in  a  sense  of  trusteeship  to  God. 
The  steward  is  the  only  really  forward-looking 
man  of  his  time.  He  is  the  citizen  of  to-morrow, 
the  saviour  of  to-day.  He  sees  that  things 
exist  for  persons  and  not  persons  for  things. 
We  all  see  this  truth  in  part,  but  the  steward 
sees  it  steadily  and  sees  it  whole. 

Stewardship  claims  to  be  timely.  Our  day  is 
characterized  by  a  reversion  to  pagan  ideals. 
Just  how  far  the  war  fostered  this  one  cannot 
say.  But  that  it  is  here  thoughtful  observers 
do  not  doubt.  Much  is  doubtless  the  sur¬ 
vival  of  pagan  and  barbarous  ideas.  We 
suffer  sadly  from  selfishness.  Our  civilization 
needs  healing,  it  needs  synthesis.  To  quote 
Professor  Conklin:  4 ‘When  one  considers  the 
utter  anachronism  presented  by  the  survival 
of  primitive  or  even  savage  ideals  of  religion, 
not  only  in  an  age  of  general  enlightenment 
but  even  in  persons  of  high  intelligence  and 
culture;  .  .  .  when  one  reflects  on  the  fact  that 
for  nineteen  centuries  so  great  a  part  of  the 
world  that  professes  to  be  Christian  has  re¬ 
mained  heathen  at  heart,  and  that  to-day  the 
teachings  of  Jesus  are  generally  regarded  by 

his  so-called  followers  as  too  lofty  to  be  prac- 

20 


STEWARDSHIP  CLAIMS 


tical,  we  may  well  wonder  whether  mankind 
is  making  any  progress  in  religion.”3  Now, 
stewardship  comes  at  a  time  like  this  with 
its  invigorating  emphasis  on  the  enthronement 
of  good  above  goods.  It  comes  to  make  prop¬ 
erty  safe  for  the  soul.  It  furnishes  a  perspective 
on  personality  and  on  property  that  makes  the 
relation  between  these  two  the  glorifying  of 
God.  4 ‘Nothing  can  prevent  mankind  from 
sinking  beneath  the  tremendous  temptations 
due  to  modern  wealth  and  power  save  the 
creation  of  a  strong  religious  life  which  shall 
lead  us  to  consecrate  our  control  over  nature 
to  the  process  of  bringing  in  the  kingdom  of 
God.”4  And  stewardship,  timely  for  the  world, 
is  timely  for  the  church.  Though  seen  in  the 
light  of  the  hope  of  the  early  return  of  our 
Lord,  the  early  church  placed  property  at  the 
service  of  personality.  But  soon  this  pristine 
view  was  contaminated  by  contacts  with  the 
pagan  world,  and  when  the  church  was  con¬ 
quered  by  Rome  its  capitulation  to  Mammon 
was  almost  complete.  The  monastic  move- 


3  The  Direction  of  Human  Evolution,  p.  170,  Edwin  Grant  Conklin. 
Charles  Scribner’s  Sons,  Publishers,  New  York  City. 

4  Social  Idealism  and  the  Changing  Theology,  p.  153,  G.  B.  Smith.  Uni¬ 
versity  of  Chicago  Press,  Publishers,  Chicago. 

21 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


ment  with  its  vows  of  poverty  and  obedience 
did  not  question  the  right  of  the  social  order 
from  which  it  escaped.  It  did  not  find  it 
congenial,  but  deemed  it  necessary.  Nor  were 
things  bettered  much  when  the  Reformation 
came.  The  revolt  against  institutionalism 
fostered  an  individualism  that  was  narrow  in 
the  extreme.  The  streak  on  the  page  Luther 
wrote  in  history  may  be  traced  to  his  incom¬ 
petent  grasp  of  the  social  teachings  of  Christ. 
The  theory  of  purpose  later  came  to  be  re¬ 
placed  by  the  theory  of  mechanism,  and  the 
sense  of  obligation  succumbed  to  the  sense  of 
ownership.  To-day,  with  all  of  our  social 
gospel,  many  church  members  still  think  of 
Christianity  chiefly  in  individualistic  terms  and 
lack  the  conception  of  their  trusteeship  for 
God  in  the  affairs  of  everyday  life.  It  is  timely 
for  the  church  to  be  recalled  to  a  Christian 
view  of  life.  Horace  Bushnell  said  that  the 
church  needs  but  one  more  revival  to  win  the 
world  for  Christ — a  revival  of  stewardship. 
How  timely,  then,  for  this” movement  to  recall 
the  church  to  the  task  for  which  it  chiefly 
exists.  Nor  could  anything  be  more  timely 
for  the  individual.  We  are  told  that  “the 

doctrine  of  the  selfless  life”  constitutes  “the 

22 


/ 


STEWARDSHIP  CLAIMS 

one  really  great  epoch  in  moral  evolution,  .  .  . 
comparable  in  its  effect  to  the  Copernican 
revolution  in  astronomy  and  the  remodeling 
of  scientific  method  achieved  in  the  period 
from  Galileo  to  Newton. 9,5  But  this  doctrine 
admittedly  is  “only  one  half  of  the  truth.” 
It  is  not  self-divestment  but  self-investment 
Christianity  asks.  It  is  self-divestment  from 
control  over  things  and  self-investment  for  a 
cause  that  makes  acceptance  of  stewardship  an 
epochal  event  in  one’s  life.  Stewardship  is  the 
only  healthy  diet  for  the  soul.  Lastly,  stew¬ 
ardship  is  timely  for  the  sake  of  Jesus  Christ . 
Stewardship  gives  him  a  chance.  It  widens 
the  application  of  his  religion.  New  laurels 
will  be  placed  upon  his  brow.  He  will  be 
crowned  conqueror  in  realms  long  withheld 
from  his  sway,  and  they  will  bloom  to  holi¬ 
ness  under  the  mild  dominion  of  the  Prince 
of  Peace. 

Because  stewardship  is  grounded  in  social 
spirituality  there  are  a  number  of  claims  which 
it  comes  to  make  upon  us.  It  asks  that  we 
rethink  our  faith,  that  we  remold  our  standards, 
that  we  enter  into  the  joy  of  unselfishness.  For 

*  The  Rational  Good ,  L.  T.  Hobhouae.  Henry  Holt  and  Co.,  Publishers, 
New  York  City. 


23 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


itself  it  makes  the  claim  that  it  has  the  vision 
needed  for  a  better  way  of  life,  and  that  its 
message  is  timely  for  the  day  in  which  we 
live.  Every  Christian,  therefore,  ought  to 
consider  its  case.  And  he  must  give  it  his 
vote;  neutrality  is  impossible;  he  must  be  for 
or  against! 


24 


* 


“When  the  Pharisees  heard  he  had  silenced  the 
Sadducees,  they  mustered  their  forces,  and  one 
of  them,  a  jurist,  put  a  question  in  order  to  tempt 
him.  ‘Teacher/  he  said,  ‘what  is  the  greatest  com¬ 
mand  in  the  Law?’  He  replied,  ‘ You  must  love  the 
Lord  your  God  with  your  whole  heart ,  with  your  whole 
soul ,  and  with  your  whole  mind.  This  is  the  great¬ 
est  and  chief  command.  There  is  a  second  like  it: 
you  must  love  your  neighbor  as  yourself.  The  whole 
Law  and  the  prophets  hang  upon  these  two  com¬ 
mands/  ”■ — Jesus. 

“The  only  way  out ...  is  to  revise  our  concep¬ 
tions  of  values,  and  to  put  the  kingdom  of  God 
first.  If  we  do  this  and  look  at  real  values,  at 
values  of  intellect,  heart,  and  conscience,  and  sub¬ 
ordinate  our  doing  and  thinking  to  the  kingdom 
of  God,  there  will  be  no  trouble  in  solving  all  other 
practical  problems  that  may  arise.  And  until  we 
do  this  we  must  worry  along  as  at  present  in  blind¬ 
ness  and  confusion  and  bitterness  of  soul.  There 
can  be  no  abiding  peace  or  joy,  whether  in  the 
personal  or  in  the  social  life,  until  men  make  the 
kingdom  of  God  first  and  fundamental.” — Borden 
P.  Bowne.1  I 

_ 

1  The  Essence  of  Religion,  pp.  274,  275,  Borden  P.  Bowne.  Houghton 
Mifflin  Co.,  Publishers,  Boston  and  New  York. 

26 


* 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  FOUNDATIONS  OF 
STEWARDSHIP 

Jesus  believed  in  life.  His  was  a  social 
faith.  Of  course  we  all  have  “the  will  to 
live.”  When  we  speak  of  “the  struggle  for  ex¬ 
istence”  or  “the  instinct  for  self-preservation” 
we  express  our  love  of  life.  All  evolutionary 
theories  assume  our  devotion  to  existence. 
But  Christ’s  belief  in  life  was  a  boundless 
enthusiasm.  It  must  have  been  patent  to 
him,  as  to  any  observant  man  in  his  day, 
that  the  career  he  had  chosen  was  not  con¬ 
ducive  to  longevity;  yet  life,  not  death,  was 
his  theme.  Indeed,  his  very  thought  of  death 
was  in  terms  of  life.  For  him  b-e-l-i-e-f 
always  spelled  b-e-l-i-f-e.  He  believed  in  life 
so  strongly  that  he  spent  his  life  on  it.  Never 
was  he  more  in  earnest  than  when  he  spoke 

of  it.  He  could  conceive  of  no  more  heinous 

27 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


offense  than  the  dulling  or  crippling  of  life. 
Acclaimed  as  the  light  of  life,  he  never  made 
light  of  it.  Life  was  his  criterion.  Vociferous 
applause  gains  one  no  standing  with  Christ. 
Merely  to  compliment  him  is  to  “damn”  him 
“with  faint  praise.”  To  be  his  friend  one 
must  hold  life  dearer  than  one’s  life.  That 
poilu  who  wrote  his  mother  just  before  the 
zero  hour  at  Verdun:  “Don’t  grieve  for  me, 
mother.  The  beauty  of  life  is  far  more  than 
life  itself,”  had  the  only  view  agreeable  to 
Jesus.  Christ  has  no  ear  for  those  who  but 
say  to  him  “Lord,  Lord,”  but  those  who  do 
the  will  of  his  Father  in  the  loving  and  lifting 
of  life  gain  his  unstinted  praise.  The  world 
has  never  known  a  greater  advocate  of  life 
than  Jesus.  No  one  surpassed  him  in  sensing 
solidarity  with  life. 

What  hurt  Jesus  to  the  heart  was  that  most 

of  the  folks  he  met  were  living  on  the  fringe 

of  life.  They  were  content  with  so  little  of  it. 

They  did  not  invade  life.  This  is  why  he 

voiced  the  longing,  “Ye  will  not  come  to  me 

that  ye  might  have  life.”  It  is  clear  now  that 

to  study  biology  without  biography  is  to  know 

the  form  of  life  but  to  miss  the  power  thereof. 

Fortunate  indeed  should  we  account  ourselves 

28 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


that  the  portals  of  our  libraries  swing  wide  to 
let  us  freely  commune  with  leviathan  lives. 
Such  communion  begets  the  conviction  that  all 
great  lives  invaded  life!  They  were  adven¬ 
turers  into  its  unfrequented  realms.  They 
were  “pioneer  souls  who  blazed  their  paths 
where  highways  never  ran.”1  They  pursued 
“time- winds  out  of  chaos  from  the  star-fields 
of  the  Lord.”2  The  language  of  the  Master 
was  vocal  in  their  careers:  “I  came  that  ye 
might  have  life  .  .  .  abundantly.”  They  loved 
life  enough  to  invest  their  lives  in  its  behalf. 
They  made  it  clear  that  to  aim  at  life  we  must 
aim  with  life. 

To  account  for  the  viewpoint  of  Christ,  you 
must  consider  not  only  his  belief  in  life,  but 
his  belief  about  it.  When  we  seek  to  know 
what  life  is  we  come  to  the  discovery  that 
no  one  has  definitely  defined  it  for  us.  No 
one  is  likely  to.  “Science,  when  a  definition 
of  the  ultimate  meaning  of  life  is  demanded 
of  it,  is  no  nearer  a  solution  to-day  than  it  was 
of  old.”3  Herbert  Spencer  came  as  near  to 


1  Sam  Walter  Foss. 

2  Vachel  Lindsay. 

3  Foundations  of  Faith,  p.  21,  John  Kelman.  Fleming  H.  Revell  Com¬ 
pany,  Publishers,  New  York  City. 


29 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


defining  life  as  any  scientist  probably  will, 
when  he  spoke  of  it  as  the  sum  total  of  the 
forces  that  can  resist  death !  )  Professor  J. 
Arthur  Thomson’s  great  “Outline  of  Science” 
recites  “the  procession  of  life  through  the 
ages  and  .  .  .  the  linking  of  life  to  life,4”  but 
a  definition  it  does  not  attempt  to  give.  Sir 
Oliver  Lodge  pursues  the  atom  to  its  lair,  and 
not  content  with  the  electron,  comes  upon  the 
ion,  so  small  that  there  must  be  a  mass-meeting 
of  multitudes  of  them  before  their  gathering 
can  be  visible  to  the  unaided  eye.  But  the 
meaning  is  not  thus  found.  Turn  to  a  modern 
philosopher  like  Bergson  and  you  are  in  a 
whirl  of  definitions  in  which  consistency  has 
hard  sledding.  From  times  immemorial  men 
have  set  themselves  to  answer  the  question  of 
life  and  in  the  day  in  which  we  live  men  never 
get  quit  of  it.  Why  is  the  answer  not  forth¬ 
coming?  Because,  while  existence  may  be 
static,  or,  rather,  may  seem  so  to  be,  life  is 
on  the  move.  Not  by  its  roots,  but  by  its 
fruits,  as  Dr.  Fosdick  has  said,  must  life  be 
judged.  So  long  as  Browning’s  description  of 
man  must  be  acknowledged  even  partially  true, 

4  The  Outline  of  Science,  vol.  1,  p.  6,  J.  Arthur  Thomson.  G.  P. 
Putnam’s  Sons,  Publishers,  New  York  City. 

30 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


“  .  .  .  he  .  .  . 

Finds  progress,  man’s  distinctive  mark  alone. 

Not  God’s,  and  not  the  beasts’ :  God  is,  they  are, 

Man  partly  is  and  wholly  hopes  to  be,” 

life  will  escape  all  dictionary  strait  jackets  and  " 
encyclopaedia  cages.  Experience  will  speak 
trumpet- tongued  where  definitions  are  dumb. 

“He  finds  progress  ”  Jesus  preferred  descrip¬ 
tion  to  definition.  He  was  all  the  time  speaking 
of  life  in  terms  of  growth.  As  he  saw  it,  life 
is  not  something  ready  made;  it  is  something 
in  the  making.  We  are  not  so  much  beings 
as  becomings.  Not  so  long  ago  religion  per¬ 
sisted  in  repressing  life.  This  stage  has  not 
been  totally  outgrown.  Else  why  the  frequent 
admonitions  to  be  content  with  our  lot?  But? 
for  the  most  part,  religious  leaders  in  our  day 
foster  fullness  of  life.  They  thus  prove  true 
to  the  genius  of  Christ,  for  Christ  rings  in  the 
life  that  is  to  be.  We  cannot  stay  put  and  -v 
stay  Christian.  It  may  be  the  task  of  science 
to  place  an  interrogation  mark  behind  life  and 
pronounce  it  a  question.  But  it  must  be  the 
task  of  Christianity  to  place  an  exclamation 
mark  behind  life  and  call  it  a  quest.  These 
are,  of  course,  not  mutually  exclusive.  But 

for  Christianity  to  come  short  of  this  would 

31 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


be  to  play  traitor  to  its  truth.  With  Living¬ 
stone,  it  must  “go  anywhere,  provided  it  be 
forward.” 

This,  you  say,  is  simple  enough.  The  fact 
of  progress  few  now  doubt.  The  evidence  is 
all  for  it.  What  has  this  to  do  with  Christian 
life?  Much  every  way.  For  the  distinguishing 
characteristic  of  Christianity  is  that  it  con¬ 
ceives  of  life  as  'progress  in  love.  To  speak  of 
love  is  to  use  a  word  of  which  very  loose  use 
is  made.  The  love  that  seeks  its  satisfaction 
in  getting  disintegrates  life.  The  love  that 
seeks  its  satisfaction  in  giving  unifies  life. 
Needless  to  say,  the  latter  alone  is  Christian: 

“Love  is  a  flame  to  burn  out  human  wills, 

Love  is  a  flame  to  set  the  will  on  fire. 

Love  is  a  flame  to  cheat  men  into  mire. 

One  of  the  three,  we  make  love  what  we  choose.”5 

Jesus  hailed  life  as  progress  in  love.  It  meant 
the  deepening  of  devotion. 

But  devotion  to  whom?  Again  the  answer 
is  written  large  in  all  the  gospel  records.  De¬ 
votion,  first  of  all,  to  God.  The  secret  of  the 
success  of  Jesus  lay  in  his  constant  love  for 

6  Reprinted  by  permission  of  the  Macmillan  Company,  from  The  Widow 
in  the  Bye  Street,  Collected  Poems,  by  John  Masefield. 

32 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


God.  Men  who  paid  attention  to  his  message 
were  bound  to  gain  the  impression  that  “this 
is  life — to  know  God.”  The  consciousness  of 
God  was  foremost  in  his  life.  There  is  little 
to  fear  from  the  atheism  that  says  there  is 
no  God.  Most  thinking  folks  are  sane  enough 
to  perceive  how  foolish  it  is  to  “lecture  on 
the  corpse  of  religion  when  it  is  all  the  time 
alive  and  laughing  at  you.”  What  we  need  to 
fear  is  the  atheism  that  agrees  to  God  but 
does  not  agree  with  Him;  that  acknowledges 
His  existence,  but  does  not  seek  His  life.  The 
God  who  is  revealed  in  Jesus  is  achieved  in 
life.  Life  is  life  only  if  we  experience  God. 
And  “he  that  loveth  not  knoweth  not  God, 
for  God  is  love.” 

Let  us  be  perfectly  clear  at  this  point.  Know¬ 
ing  God  does  not  depend  upon  assent  to 
a  creed.  Of  late,  putting  up  creeds  as  straw 
men  to  be  adroitly  knocked  down  has  been 
grossly  overworked.  Yet  creeds  that  were 
made  to  express  life  have  been  made  to  repress 
it.  The  implements  of  religion  have  some¬ 
times  served  as  impediments  to  finding  God. 
But  not  always.  It  is  simply  not  true  that 

“When  whelmed  are  altar,  priest  and  creed, 
When  all  the  faiths  have  passed; 

33 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


Perhaps,  from  darkening  incense  freed, 

God  may  emerge  at  last.”6 

For  those  who  have  thus  far  known  God  best 
have  highly  valued  “altar,  priest  and  creed/’ 
and  prophet  and  pulpit  have  shared  this 
esteem.  So  long  as  man  endures  he  will  try 
to  crowd  into  language  the  experience  that  is 
his.  What  we  need  to  recognize  is  that  creeds 
at  their  best  only  show  what  men  have  found 
out  about  God;  it  takes  life  to  show  that  we 
ourselves  have  found  Him.  Browning  had  the 
truth  of  it: 

\ 

“  .  .  .  To  know 

Rather  consists  in  opening  a  way 
Whence  the  imprisoned  splendor  may  escape, 
Than  in  effecting  entry  for  a  light 
Supposed  to  be  without.” 

Some  words  from  the  pen  of  Lyman  Abbott, 
whose  writings  conclusively  demonstrate  that 
an  old  man  can  have  young  ideas,  are  relevant 
here:  “Christ  does  not  teach  us  about  God;  he 
makes  us  acquainted  with  God.  ...  To  him 
God  was  not  a  hypothesis  but  a  personal  and 
intimate  friend.  He  did  not  from  a  study  of 

6  “ Revelations ,”  New  Poems,  p.  90,  by  William  Watson.  Dodd,  Mead 
and  Company,  Publishers,  New  York  City. 

34 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


the  creation  arrive  at  the  conclusion  that 
there  is  a  Creator,  as  the  scientist  from  a 
study  of  the  arrowheads  found  in  rocks  arrives 
at  the  conclusion  that  there  was  a  prehistoric 
man.  He  was  acquainted  with  God  as  a  child 
is  acquainted  with  his  father,  and  his  aim  was, 
not  to  demonstrate  by  the  scientific  method 
the  existence  of  a  Creator,  but  to  impart  to 
his  disciples  a  spirit  of  filial  obedience  which 
would  give  to  them  an  experience  of  com¬ 
panionship  with  God  similar  to  his  own.  He 
himself  lived  in  continual  and  unbroken  com¬ 
panionship  with  God;  and  he  sought  to  inspire 
in  his  disciples  a  spirit  which  would  enable 
them  to  live  in  similar  companionship.”7 
To  set  out  on  one’s  career  without  God  is 
to  put  one’s  life  into  bankruptcy  before 
business  has  begun.  God  must  be  given  pre¬ 
eminence.  For  life,  he  must  come  first.  For 
life,  he  must  stay  first.  He  must  be  the  'per¬ 
manent  passion .  To  place  him  second  is  to 
place  him  last.  God  must  be  paramount  and 
basic.  He  is  the  great  necessity.  He  is  the 
essential.  God  is  life.  And  life  is  growth  in 
God.  To  grow  in  God  is  to  grow  like  him. 

7  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  What 
Christianity  Means  to  Me,  by  Lyman  Abbott. 

35 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 

4 ‘Deeply  seen,  the  moral  ideal  is  not  something 
which  you  wish  to  possess  as  something  exter¬ 
nal  to  you,  but  it  is  something  that  you  wish 
to  become.  Unless  growth  in  truth  or  goodness 
is  in  the  last  resort  your  growth,  whatever 
else  it  is,  it  is  meaningless.”8  To  know  God 
is  not  merely  to  like  him;  it  is  to  grow  like 
him.  People  saw  “the  light  of  the  knowledge 
of  the  glory  of  God  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ.” 
How  far  have  we  progressed  in  God-expression? 

Jesus  met  the  test  at  the  beginning  of  his 
career.  He  had  to  choose  between  following 
God  and  the  pursuit  of  self.  His  three  tempta¬ 
tions  are  summed  up  in  three  words,  “Cast 
thyself  down.”  This  is  still  the  Satanic  whisper: 
“Lower  yourself;  be  less  than  God  intends  you 
to  be;  be  content  with  a  low  purpose.”  To 
temptations  such  as  these  Jesus  refused  to  suc¬ 
cumb.  He  accounted  the  reign  of  God  supreme. 
He  refused  to  take  orders  from  his  purse. 
Neither  praise  nor  gain  could  have  dominion 
over  him.  He  sought  first  the  Kingdom. 

Stewardship  is  founded  upon  this  allegiance 
to  God.  It  comes  to  admonish  us  all  that 
the  basis  of  life  must  be  clear  That  must  be 

8  The  Truths  We  Live  By,  Jay  William  Hudson.  D.  Appleton  and  Co., 
Publishers,  New  York  City. 


36 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


settled  first.  The  fundamental  question  is 
how  to  keep  life  related  to  God.  With  this 
settled  all  other  problems  take  on  aspects  of 
light.  With  this  unsettled  other  problems  grope 
at  noonday  as  in  the  night.  Until  you  deter¬ 
mine  the  drift  of  life  your  life  will  be  adrift. 
To  be  partner  with  Christ  in  the  purpose  of  God 
is  the  goal  of  stewardship. 

But  more  remains  to  be  said.  We  cannot 
interpret  Jesus  except  in  terms  of  service. 
We  measure  his  success  by  his  love  of  man. 
God 


“  .  .  .  had  given  him  birth 
To  brother  all  the  sons  of  earth.”8 9 


He  lived  for  others.  He  said:  “I  came  that 
ye  might  have.”  The  ages  are  debtor  to  him. 
When  he  plumbed  the  depths  of  his  own  mo¬ 
tives  he  confessed,  “For  their  sakes  I  sanctify 
myself.”  He  owned  to  being  “a  witness  to 
the  truth.”  At  a  service  conducted  in  his 
home  town  he  spoke  these  weighty  phrases: 
“The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me:  for  he 
has  consecrated  me  to  preach  the  gospel  to 
the  poor,  he  has  sent  me  to  proclaim  release 

8  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  The 
Everlasting  Mercy,  Collected  Poems,  by  John  Masefield. 

37 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


for  captives  and  recovery  of  sight  for  the 
blind,  to  set  free  the  oppressed,  to  proclaim 
the  Lord’s  year  of  favor.”  His  characteristic 
attitude  was:  “I  go  to  prepare  .  .  .  for  you.” 
His  consecration  was  social.  The  ultimate  im- 
n  pression  he  created  was  that  “God  so  loved 
the  world  that  he  sent”  him.  He  humanized 
religion.  Henceforth,  the  service  of  God 
meant  the  service  of  man. 

Now  that  we  are  free  to  read  the  New  Testa¬ 
ment  without  the  blur  of  literalism,  no  truth 

- 

stands  out  more  clearly  than  that  Christianity 
is  God's  attempt  to  bring  mankind  to  manhood. 
To  those  who  had  barely  existence,  but  much 
oppression  and  woe,  he  promised  abundant 
life.  To  people  who  had  far  more  excuse  for 
their  littleness  than  we,  he  said:  “ Pagans  make 
food  and  drink  their  aim  in  life,  but  your 
Father  knows  quite  well  that  you  need  that; 
only  seek  his  Realm,  and  it  will  be  yours  over 
and  above.”  How  often  he  was  moved  with 
compassion  toward  those  who  seemed  shep¬ 
herdless  sheep.  The  tug  of  the  world  was  at 
his  heart!  To  say  that  he  had  respect  for  life 
is  to  put  the  truth  mildly.  It  is  more  accurate 
to  say  that  he  reverenced  life.  With  unabated 

enthusiasm  he  labored  for  its  sake.  To  deal 

38 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


with  life  is  to  tread  on  holy  ground.  Life  is 
th$  Jbush  that  burns  but  is  not  consumed. 

Many  respect  life  with  their  theories  who 
desecrate  it  with  their  practice.  This  dual 


attitude  means  spiritual 


enough  to  give  casual  consent  to  the  sublim¬ 
ity  of  life.  In  some  respects  nothing  is  more 
commonly  acknowledged.  We  agree  that  the 
child  of  the  bootblack  has  as  much  right  to 
the  best  medical  service  as  the  child  of  the 
millionaire.  But  to  put  reverence  for  life  into 
practice  is  a  different  thing  by  far.  Our  service 
must  articulate  our  love .  Conversion  must  bring 
not  only  newness  of  joy  but  newness  of  life. 
Nothing  short  of  this  will  move  us  to  realign 
our  social  order  so  that  it  ministers  to  life. 
Nothing  short  of  this  can  weld  the  nations 
into  the  solidarity  of  saviourhood.  Christ 
proceeded  on  the  assumption  that  life  responds 
to  life.  The  keepers  of  the  house  of  greed 
may  well  tremble  at  thought  of  this  Christian 
appraisal  of  life.  Once  it  becomes  dominant 
the  realm  of  Mammon  shall  wither  into  deso¬ 
lation  and  the  light  shall  be  darkened  in  the 
heavens  thereof.  The  Christian  God  desires 
fullness  of  life  for  all  his  children,  and  no  one  and 
nothing  has  the  right  to  withhold  it  from  them. 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


The  mark  of  stewardship  inv  a  follower  of 
Jesus  is  this  social  sincerity.  Conscious  that 
“this  is  life:  to  know  God,”  he  will  remember 
that,  as  Amiel  phrased  it,  “Christianity,  mys¬ 
tical  in  its  root,  is  practical  in  its  fruits.”  In 
the  light  of  the  meaning  of  life  he  will  read 
his  mission  in  life.  Life’s  worth  will  determine 
life’s  work.  He  will  not  deliberately  choose 
a  profession  or  business  inconsistent  with  or 
merely  neutral  toward  his  Christian  confession. 
If  necessity  has  forced  him  into  employment 
not  congenial  to  the  advancement  of  the 
Christian  cause,  he  will  be  instant  in  season 
and  out  to  evince  his  concern  for  the  day  when 
the  will  of  God  shall  be  done. 

For  young  folks  this  issue  of  social  sincerity 
admits  of  no  delay.  Shrink  from  the  thought 
as  some  may,  in  youth  we  choose  for  life! 
Statistics  furnish  copious  proof  that  the  Chris¬ 
tian  cause  depends  upon  the  choice  of  youths. 
There  are  some  who  at  middle  age  ask  of  the 
Lord,  “Revive  thy  work  in  the  midst  of  the 
years.”  But  most  of  these  who  failed  to 
settle  this  question  in  youth  find  themselves 
victims  to  “the  destruction  that  wasteth  at 
noonday.”  They  have  never  tasted  life,  yet 
they  glibly  talk  of  disillusionment !  Speaking 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


broadly,  we  either  give  Christ  allegiance  in 
the  days  of  our  youth  or  we  give  it  not  at  all. 

Moreover,  youth  cannot  put  off  the  day  of 
decision  with  assurance  that  it  will  recur. 
We  cannot  halt  the  years  to  “halt  between 
two  opinions.”  We  must  answer  with  our 
lives .  We  do!  Ever  the  answer  is  an  attitude. 
What  is  my  life  to  do?  hinges  upon  the  ques¬ 
tion,  Whose  is  my  life  to  be?  When  God  has 
you  he  can  direct  yours.  You  will  discern 
God’s  directions  for  your  life  when  you  go 
God’s  direction  with  your  life.  You  will  be 
saved  to  serve. 

This  social  sincerity,  this  genuine  determina¬ 
tion  to  lift  mankind  to  God,  is  needed  the 
more  because  of  the  world  which  we  to-day 
confront.  “The  religious  problem  of  our  day 
is  not  a  problem  in  metaphysics  or  theology; 
it  is  a  problem  in  the  practical  values  of  human 
living.”  Thus  an  observant  writer,  Dr.  Charles 
A.  Ellwood,  declares,  and  adds:  “There  is 
unfortunately  abundant  evidence  just  at  pres¬ 
ent  in  the  civilized  world  of  reversion  to  a 
lower  plane  of  moral  and  religious  values  than 
existed  a  generation  ago; .  .  .  and  while  there 
may  be  many  grounds  for  encouragement, 

...  it  is  useless  to  deny  or  to  gloss  over  the 

41 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


facts  which  seem  to  indicate  partial  social, 

moral,  and  religious  retrogression.”10  An  in¬ 
teresting  sidelight  on  this  is  the  return  to 

earlier  religious  standards  on  the  part  of 
many  who  still  take  to  themselves  the  name 
of  Christ.  We  thus  find  Christian  ethics 
submerged  by  Jewish  concepts  and  New- 
Testament  standards  of  life  forsaken  for  Old- 
Testament  standards  of  belief.  It  has  been 
well  said  that  a  single  page  could  hold  all  the 
utterances  of  Jesus  upon  such  subjects  as  the 
soul  and  death  and  the  hereafter.  His  concern 
was  with  life .  “Christianity,”  says  Bishop 
Gore,  “came  out  into  the  world  as  ‘the  way.’ 
It  was  a  life  before  it  was  a  doctrine.”  The 
Christian  faith  is  inevitably  social.  The  reso¬ 
lute  effort  to  make  society  godlike  will  save 
the  church  from  the  contamination  of  these 
lower  types.  The  social  awakening  will  save 
our  spiritual  life  from  the  sleep  of  death. 

Stewardship,  then,  is  founded  upon  social 
spirituality.  Professor  Edward  G.  Conklin,  in 
The  Direction  of  Human  Evolution,11  reminds 
us  that  “in  the  past  religion  has  dealt  to  a 


10  Reprinted  by  permission  of  the  Macmillan  Company,  from  The 
Reconstruction  of  Religion,  by  Charles  A.  Ellwood. 

11  Charles  Scribner’s  Sons,  Publishers,  New  York  City. 

42 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


large  extent  with  the  individual  and  his  rela¬ 
tion  to  God;  its  chief  concern  was  the  salva¬ 
tion  of  individual  souls  and  their  preparation 
for  a  future  life;  it  has  been  largely  egocentric . 
The  religion  of  the  future  must  more  and  more 
deal  with  the  salvation  of  society;  it  must  be 
ethnocentric  .”  And  Edward  Caird  once  wrote, 
“A  man’s  religion  is  the  expression  of  his 
ultimate  attitude  toward  the  universe.”  Unless 
our  consciousness  of  God  means  a  concern  for 
humanity  we  worship  some  deity  other  than 
the  Father  of  our  Lord.  After  Pentecost  had 
come  his  followers  were  actuated  by  this  social 
sense  of  the  spiritual.  Slaves  walked  with  sing¬ 
ing  hearts  and  heads  erect,  conscious  of  a 
relationship  that  made  them  free  in  bondage. 
These  early  Christians  had  a  self-esteem  that 
led  to  esteem  for  others.  Anything  short  of 
this  they  knew  to  be  false  to  the  spirit  of 
Christ.  But  the  church  was  unable  to  keep 
this  vision.  Its  profound  and  simple  reverence 
for  life  was  soon  contaminated  by  alien  con¬ 
tacts  and  soon  was  fairly  smothered  beneath 
the  load  of  Roman  paganism.  Small  wonder 
that  the  church  in  the  Middle  Ages  laid  so 
little  emphasis  on  regard  for  human  life.  The 

ancient  Christian  esteem  for  life  began  to  come 

43 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


back  into  its  own  with  the  challenging  doctrine 
of  the  priesthood  of  believers  which  Martin 
Luther  taught.  According  to  it,  the  fulfill¬ 
ment  of  one’s  devotional  life  lies  within  one’s 
own  reach.  But  Luther  did  not  follow  out 
the  logic  of  this  thought.  Why  should  any 
realm  of  endeavor  strive  for  less  than  to  fill 
life  full?  When  Wesley  claimed  the  world 
for  his  parish  the  viewpoint  that  reverences 
men  began  to  be  reclaimed.  The  struggle  is 
still  on.  Old  prejudices  die  hard  and  slow. 
Man  has  a  hard  time  of  it  to  respect  mankind. 
But  the  old  order  changeth.  Woodrow  Wilson’s 
statement  is  now  seen  to  be  true:  “The  truths 
that  are  not  translated  into  lives  are  dead 
truths.”  Stewardship  comes  to  ask,  “Do  you 
believe  in  life  as  Christ  believed  in  it?” 

Professor  Giddings  attributes  history  to  the 

adventurers.  Jesus  thought  faith.  And  he 

always  looked  for  it.  He  never  spoke  of  fate. 

Fate  says  that  what  happens  must  happen; 

faith  says  that  what  must  happen  happens. 

Fate  is  the  religion  of  Islam,  and  Islam  means, 

“I  submit  to  God’s  plan.”  Faith  is  the  religion 

of  Christianity,  and  Christianity  means,  “I 

subscribe  to  God’s  plan.”  One  who  subscribes 

to  God's  flan  embraces  stewardship.  He  will 

44 


FOUNDATIONS  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


not  be  cowed  by  the  voice  of  tradition  or  the 
clamor  of  the  crowd.  He  will  dare  to  think 
unpopular  thoughts.  Christ  was  no  innocuous 
Apollo  at  play  on  some  Olympian  mountain. 
He  had  problems  to  face  and  faced  them  with¬ 
out  flinching  at  the  exactions  they  involved. 
“He  set  his  face  steadfastly  to  go  to  Jeru¬ 
salem/’  He  took  a  short-cut  to  death.  He 
hurled  his  life  after  his  faith.  His  ideas  were 
his  ideals.  Brave  without  bravado,  he  saved 
others  and  spared  not  himself.  His  way  of 
thinking  infuriated  the  religious  leaders  of 
his  day.  He  insisted  upon  thinking  all  things 
through  to  God.  This  is  the  wont  of  steward¬ 
ship.  The  leaders  of  his  day  could  not  under¬ 
stand  it.  Their  thoughts  had  root  in  tradition. 
The  sweep  of  their  minds  reached  the  fathers. 
But  Jesus  brushed  past  tradition  to  God. 
They  said,  “It  hath  been  said.”  Such  argu¬ 
ments  left  Jesus  unmoved.  He  answered,  “But 
I  say,”  and  reasoned  up  to  God.  He  never 
lost  God  out  of  mind.  A  man  who  does  that 
courts  hatred.  He  invites  death.  Edward 
Arlington  Robinson  fancies  John  Brown  say¬ 
ing  to  his  wife: 

“Now  and  again  to  some  lone  soul  or  other 

God  speaks  and  there  is  hanging  to  be  done,” 

45 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 

and  ending  the  conversation  with  these  words: 
“I  shall  have  more  to  say  when  I  am  dead.”12 
For  such  sacrifice  is  itself  creative.  Such 
death  alone  saves  life.  Stewardship  spells 
sacrifice.  Stewardship  roots  in  the  cross.  It 
seeks  to  make  Christians  consistent  with  Christ. 

To  review  what  has  thus  far  been  said: 
Stewardship  is  founded  on  the  sense  of  reach 
for  God  and  humankind.  Stewards  are  in 
earnest  for  the  reign  of  God  on  earth.  They 
therefore  seek  to  make  society  spiritual.  They 
know  of  no  other  way  to  follow  Jesus  Christ. 

12  “John  Brown.”  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Com¬ 
pany,  from  Collected  Poems,  by  Edwin  Arlington  Robinson. 


46 


c 


/  r 


3  3 


“Store  up  no  treasures  for  yourselves  on  earth, 
where  moth  and  rust  corrode, 
where  thieves  break  through  and  steal: 
store  up  treasures  for  yourselves  in  heaven, 
where  neither  moth  nor  rust  corrode, 
where  thieves  do  not  break  in  and  steal. 

For  where  your  treasure  lies, 
your  heart  will  lie  there  too. 

The  eye  is  the  lamp  of  the  body: 
so,  if  your  eye  is  generous, 

the  whole  of  your  body  will  be  illumined, 
but  if  your  eye  is  selfish, 

the  whole  of  your  body  will  be  darkened. 
And  if  your  very  light  turns  dark, 
then — what  a  darkness  it  is! 

No  one  can  serve  two  masters : 

either  he  will  hate  the  one  and  love  the 
other,  or  else  he  will  stand  by  the  one 
and  despise  the  other — 
you  cannot  serve  both  God  and  Mam¬ 
mon.  .  .  . 

Seek  God’s  Realm  and  his  goodness.  ...” 

— J  esus. 

“Things  are  in  the  saddle  and  ride  mankind.” — 
Ralph  Waldo  Emerson. 


48 


CHAPTER  III 
SOCIAL  CHRISTIANS 


The  challenge  of  stewardship  has  such  an 
intimate  bearing  upon  every  one  of  us  that 
its  total  effect  upon  life  ought  to  be  thought 
through.  Knowing  the  God  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  and  securing  his  reign  in  the  earth  is 
the  intent  of  Christian  life.  Stewardship  says 
that  the  content  of  life  must  be  an  aid  to  this. 
When  Jesus  had  to  decide  his  life  he  had  to 
face  the  temptation  which  all  of  us  have  to 
face.  He  was  tempted  to  give  content  precedence 
over  intent.  It  was  suggested  that  he  dethrone 
himself  and  enthrone  things.  As  has  been 
previously  noted,  “Cast  thyself  down,”  was 
the  Satanic  proposal,  and  the  Satanic  promise 
was  “All  these  things  will  I  give  thee.”  But 
Jesus  was  above  the  lure  of  things.  This  is 
why  he  questioned,  earnestly:  “Know  ye  not 
that  I  must  be  about  my  Father’s  business?” 
He  was  in  tent  upon  the  intent  of  life.  He 
repudiated  the  notion  that  a  man’s  life  con- 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


sists  in  the  abundance  of  the  things  he  pos¬ 
sesses — yet  how  the  notion  lingers  still!  He 
refused  to  let  things  have  dominion  over  him. 
It  was  impossible  for  him  to  be  con  tent  with 
content.  He  resolved  to  be  true  to  the  intent 
of  life  of  die  in  the  attempt.  And  die  he  did! 
Yet  when  was  death  life-saving  more  than 
his?  Kipling  reports  that  “three  hundred 
miles  of  cannon  spoke  when  the  master-gunner 
died.”  This  was  but  as  a  whisper  compared 
to  the  voice  that  spoke  when  the  Master- 
Saviour  died,  and  that  speaks  still  and  still 
shall  speak  because  he  lives ! 

He  who  decides  to  be  true  to  the  intent 
of  life  has  a  fight  on  his  hands.  The  tempta¬ 
tion  to  let  the  content  of  life  subvert  the 
intent  of  it  assails  us  constantly.  For  one 
thing,  the  contents  of  life  are  ever  before  us 
and  with  us.  We  cannot  get  quit  of  them. 
They  are  catalogued  in  daily  and  magazine; 
they  call  to  us  from  the  highway  and  talk  to 
us  on  the  street;  a  resistless  propaganda  is 
carried  on  in  their  behalf.  Pressing  into  service 
all  that  genius  has  devised  in  electricity,  there 
is  proclaimed  to  us  from  the  housetops  how 
much  life  can  contain.  There  never  was  a 
day  when  the  contents  of  life  received  such 

50 


SOCIAL  CHRISTIANS 


publicity.  Older  people  forget  that  this  con¬ 
stant  emphasis  on  things  was  not  thus  thrust 
upon  them  in  their  formative  years.  But  the 
young  people  of  to-day  are  reared  in  this 
atmosphere.  It  is  easier,  therefore,  for  them 
to  assume  that  the  content  view  of  life  is  the 
normal  view  to  take.  Could  the  intent  of  life 
be  advertised  as  incessantly  as  its  content, 
what  might  not  be  wrought  on  the  earth? 
It  is  a  sobering  reflection  that  good  advertising 
so  seldom  lends  itself  to  advertising  the  best. 
As  Dr.  Weymouth  translates  it,  Jesus  said: 
“Do  not  even  begin  to  be  anxious,  asking 
‘What  shall  we  eat?’  ‘What  shall  we  drink?’ 
‘What  shall  we  wear?’  Is  not  life  more  precious 
than  food  and  the  body  than  its  clothing?” 
But  business  worries  us  night  and  day  with 
the  very  things  Jesus  told  us  not  to  worry 
about.  At  times  it  appears  perniciously  per¬ 
sistent  to  keep  us  from  “ranges  beyond  these 
mud  walls  of  the  flesh.” 

Not  only  does  what  life  has  rather  than 
what  life  is  rivet  our  attention,  but  it  com¬ 
mands  our  talent  and  our  time.  We  labor 
not  only  for,  but  at,  the  bread  that  perisheth. 
Most  of  us  find  ourselves  daily  at  work  at  the 

contents  of  life.  One  may  well  question  the 

51 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


sanity  of  a  social  order  that  keeps  us  down 
so  to  the  grindstone  of  things.  Jesus  never 
forgot  that  “life  is  more  than  food.”  One 
lunatic  surpassed  in  worth  a  herd  of  Gadarene 
swine.  He  was  aware  that  constant  attach¬ 
ment  to  the  content  of  life  may  easily  develop 
into  treacherous  attachment  for  the  content 
of  life.  Hence  his  counsel  to  that  fine  young 
man  to  sell  what  he  had  and  give  it  away 
and  follow  him:  minus  content,  plus  intent. 
Jesus  observed  that  for  this  young  man  the 
quantity  in  life  submerged  the  quality  of  life. 
He  saw  with  what  difficulty  the  rich  would 
enter  the  kingdom  and  told  of  three  “prac¬ 
tical”  worthies  whose  interest  in  real  estate 
and  live  stock  and  marital  affairs  was  such  that 
they  had  the  excuse:  “ Therefore ,  I  cannot  come.” 

When  we  turn  from  the  things  we  do  for 
pay  to  the  things  we  do  for  play,  again  the 
contents  of  life  stalk  in  endless  procession 
before  us.  One  sometimes  has  the  sense  of 
being  overwhelmed  with  the  flood  of  things 
that  clamor  to  be  introduced  into  one’s  life. 
Profit  and  pleasure  precede  purpose  in  the 
voices  that  fall  on  our  ears,  and  the  voice  that 
bids  us  seek  first  the  kingdom  is  a  still  small 
voice,  scarcely  audible. 


SOCIAL  CHRISTIANS 


When  the  content  of  life  is  at  variance  with 
the  intent  of  life,  ethical  dualism  ensues ,  and 
Dr.  Jekyll  and  Mr.  Hyde  set  up  shop  where 
a  unified  soul  once  lived.  As  some  one  has  said, 
we  then  become  money-making  or  educational 
machines,  with  the  unburied  remains  of  souls 
tagging  on  behind.  Our  acts  speak  louder  than 
our  words — and  sadder — when  in  things,  instead 
of  Him,  we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being: 

“To  dress,  to  call,  to  dine,  to  break 
No  canon  of  the  social  code. 

The  little  laws  that  lacqueys  make. 

The  futile  decalogue  of  mode — 

How  many  a  soul  for  these  things  lives 
With  pious  passion,  grave  intent!  .  .  . 

And  never  ev’n  in  dreams  has  seen 
The  things  that  are  more  excellent.”1 

But  this  is  not  the  only  ill  that  befalls  those 
who  turn  their  backs  upon  Christian  steward¬ 
ship.  This  content  view  refuses  to  stay  within 
the  confines  of  mere  things.  It  leaps  over  into 
the  realms  of  mind  and  of  desire.  It  is  a  con¬ 
tagious  scourge.  The  man  who  is  not  a  steward 
of  his  'property  plays  traitor  to  the  rest  of  his 
life.  He  has  thrown  his  soul  out  of  focus. 


1  The  Collected  Poems  of  William  Watson,  p.  78.  Dodd,  Mead  and  Com¬ 
pany,  Publishers,  New  York  City. 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


Regard  how  it  works  out.  Frequently  young 
people — and  occasionally  older  folks — turn  to 
the  Bible  to  seek  information  about  life  rather 
than  formation  of  it .  Victims  of  the  content 
view,  they  pathetically  turn  the  pages  for  the 
pettiest  of  problems,  expecting  to  find  there 
ready-made  the  solutions  which  they  seek.  In 
the  Bible  too  content  rather  than  intent  is 
what  they  are  looking  for!  Not  Why  but 
What  is  the  keyword  by  which  they  seek 
admission  to  the  secrets  of  the  Book.  In 
their  eager  quest  for  the  letter  the  spirit 
falls  dead  at  their  feet.  One  is  utterly  in¬ 
capable  of  making  right  use  of  the  content 
of  the  Bible  who  does  not  hold  preeminent 
the  intent  of  the  Bible.  In  regard  to  the 
church  similar  havoc  is  wrought.  When  a 
church  service  is  considered  from  the  angle 
of  what  it  has  rather  than  from  the  angle  of 
what  it  is,  tragedy  results.  Think  on  the 
sermon.  it  is  bad  enough  that  the  initiated 
layman  expects  the  sermon  to  be  a  sort  of 
intellectual  crazy-quilt  that  is  able  to  give 
spiritual  warmth.  But  those  whose  wont  it 
is  to  judge  life  by  what  it  may  contain  expect 
the  sermon  to  be  an  easy  page  of  answers  for 

problems  given  them  to  work  out  in  the  school 

54 


SOCIAL  CHRISTIANS 


of  life.  And  they  are  sure  to  judge  the  preach¬ 
er’s  success  by  the  amount  of  money  the 
church  raised !  They  fail  to  see  that  the  minister 
would  play  false  to  his  mission  did  he  not, 
in  the  majestic  phrase  of  the  Master,  and 
quite  regardless  of  finance,  help  men  to  “think 
in  their  hearts.”  He  must  help  them  to  “cast 
the  anchor  deep  beside  the  shore-lines  of 
eternity.”  He  dares  not  be  the  prophet  of 
the  picayune.  He  is  the  proclaimer  of  that 
eternal  purpose,  in,  of,  and  for  which  life 
exists.  To  the  man  who  is  not  a  steward, 
the  man  who  is  contented  with  the  contents 
of  life  and  so  thinks  God  ought  to  be,  his 
words  and  worth  are  hidden;  they  cannot  be 
revealed.  Of  such  a  man  Drinkwater’s  words 
may  be  quoted  with  deeper  meaning  than  the 
author  perhaps  meant  with  them: 

“Coveting  the  little,  the  instant  gain. 

The  brief  security. 

And  easy-tongued  renown. 

Many  will  mock  the  vision  that  his  brain 
Builds  to  a  far,  unmeasured  monument. 

And  many  bid  his  resolutions  down 
To  the  wages  of  content.”2 

The  nonsteward  is  prevented  from  a  normal 

2  Abraham  Lincoln,  by  John  Drinkwater.  Houghton  Mifflin  Company, 
Publishers,  New  York  City. 


55 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


social  life.  In  terms  of  psychology,  his  ego- 
complex  staves  off  beneficent  gregariousness. 
He  is  controlled  by  the  consciousness  of  what 
his  life  can  contain.  Let  no  one  think  of  this 
as  something  to  be  lightly  dismissed.  It  is 
a  deplorable  condition,  pathetically  patholog¬ 
ical.  A  man  with  this  content-mood  can  never 
bring  proper  adjustment  between  the  ego- 
complex  and  the  herd-complex.  He  is  entirely 
lopsided.  The  instinct  for  self-preservation  is 
old  and  most  profound.  It  is  intended  to  lead 
us  to  social  seriousness,  but  when  it  is  stunted 
by  greed  it  inhibits  the  soul.  The  acquisition- 
complex  reverts  to  the  primitive.  There  are 
not  pathologists  enough  in  the  land  to  begin 
to  determine  how  many  enter  by  way  of  this 
complex  into  paranoia.  But  for  this  terrible 
plight,  the  views  of  the  content-view  would 
often  sound  humorous.  Concerning  one  beau¬ 
tiful  spirit  who  had  recently  been  translated, 
a  woman  of  means  (content  view)  said  to  the 
pastor  of  her  church:  “Poor  girl,  she  had  so 
little /”  And  he  answered  and  said  unto  her: 
“Madam,  you  are  mistaken.  You  say,  ‘Poor 
girl,  she  had  so  little!’  You  should  say,  ‘Rich 
girl,  she  was  so  much!' ”  Kipling’s  bachelor  also 
betrays  this  aberrant  mind:  “A  woman  is 


SOCIAL  CHRISTIANS 


only  a  woman,  but  a  good  cigar  is  a  smoke!”3 
A  common  revelation  of  this  content  view  is 
that  it  is  always  measuring  people  by  the 
money  they  have  or  make.  Does  a  preacher 
receive  a  large  salary?  Then,  lo,  a  successful 
man!  To  what  important  conference  com¬ 
mittee  would  Christ  have  been  appointed? 

The  tragedy  of  this  content-view  can  be 
traced  further  still.  The  damage  is  not  merely 
to  be  found  in  academic  terms  (or  titles!), 
official  procedure,  passion  for  statistics,  mania 
for  methods.  Nor  is  its  deepest  damage  that 
done  to  evangelism.  It  has  taken  this  word, 
unquestionably  great,  denoting  a  work,  unques¬ 
tionably  the  greatest,  robbed  it  of  its  grandeur 
and  trailed  it  in  the  dust.  Nor  was;  its  work 
at  its  worst  when,  in  the  realm  of  Life  Service, 
it  allured  young  people  to  a  position  rather 
than  to  inure  them  to  a  disposition  of  service 
for  God  and  men.  By  far  the  most  devilish  , 
deed  to  the  credit  of  the  content  view  is  that 
it  thwarts  beyond  measure  our  relationship 
to  God.  Once  the  content  of  life  takes  ascend- 
ency,  once  the  acquisitive  is  paramount,  prayer 
falls  from  heaven  as  no  Lucifer  ever  fell.  For 

8  Poems  of  Rudyard  Kipling.  Doubleday,  Page  &  Company,  Publishers, 
New  York  City. 


57 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


prayer  is  dominant  desire  and  what  we  wish 
is  what  we  ash.  Hence  our  prayers  are  often 
contradictions  of  our  prayer.  Our  attitude 
speaks  so  loud  that  God  cannot  hear  what  we 
say!  If,  now,  our  inmost  wish  is  concerned 
with  what  prayer  will  bring  us  rather  than 
what  prayer  will  make  us,  God  will  be  to  us 
a  more  or  less  exaggerated  Santa  Claus  and 
will  be  accorded  homage  in  the  ratio  that  his 
response  is  favorable  to  our  requests.  No  one 
wishes  to  arouse  antagonism  to  prayer  that 
shows  honest  desire.  But  if  things  take  the 
reins  of  our  lives,  we  will  be  driven  far  afield 
from  the  highway  that  leads  to  God.  Then, 
if  we  retain  our  interest  in  God,  it  will  be 
chiefly  in  his  rather  than  in  him.  Prayer  be¬ 
comes  a  handy  tool  rather  than  a  triumphant 
task  and  a  “moral  battlefield.”  We  ask  for 
God’s  gifts  rather  than  for  the  Gift  of  God. 
This  is  the  surpassing  sin  of  all  the  content 
view.  It  prevents  a  real  experience  of  God. 
Its  religious  aim  is  circumscribed  by  individual¬ 
ism.  n  even  thinks  of  God  as  a  possession . 
At  best  it  says,  “God  for  my  life.”  It  never 
says  (or  at  least,  it  never  means),  “My  life 
for  God.”  To  say  the  one  without  the  other 

is  to  make  both  impossible.  God  cannot  be 

68 


SOCIAL  CHRISTIANS 


ours  until  we  are  his.  “Behold  the  goodness 
and  the  severity  of  God.”  The  God  who  gives 
much  requires  much.  The  content  view  loses 
life  because  it  saves  it;  the  intent  view  saves 
life  because  it  loses  it. 

The  steward  uses  the  content  for  the  intent 
of  life.  He  does  not,  ascetic  fashion,  regard 
things  as  barbed-wire  entanglements  for  the 
soul.  He  accepts  them  gratefully.  But  to 
him  they  are  only  means  by  which  to  work 
God’s  will  into  the  lives  of  men.  This  he 
never,  never  forgets.  Property  must  never  be 
placed  above  life.  Never  may  things  be 
allowed  to  jeopardize  the  soul.  He  is  a  first- 
class  fighting  man  for  the  widow  and  father¬ 
less  and  for  the  unprivileged.  He  will  know 
what  pitiful  folly  it  is  for  a  man  to  throw  a 
rock  through  a  window  of  the  mill  from  which 
he  “strikes.”  He  will  know  how  essentially 
immoral  violence  always  is.  But  he  will  at 
least  ponder  whether  the  man  who  throws 
that  rock  is  not  registering,  in  a  dim  and 
stupid  way,  his  conviction  that  property  must 
not  interfere  with  life.  May  not  his  throwing 
stones  mean  stuffing  the  ballot  box  in  favor  of 
life?  Is  there  nothing  to  learn  for  us  here? 
The  Christian  steward  will  feel  that  if  we  quit 

69 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


calling  Reds  reds,  we  might  stand  somewnat 
of  a  chance  to  take  their  yellowness  away! 
For  the  steward  will  ever  remember  that  goods 
must  serve  man’s  good.  Nor  will  he  forget 
that  property  has  a  deep  relation  to  life.  The 
steward  will  see  that  the  stomach  has  dealings 
with  the  soul.  First,  said  Paul,  that  which 
is  natural,  then  that  which  is  spiritual.  Man’s 
best  should  not  be  used  for  property,  but 
property  for  man’s  best.  The  world  will  begin 
to  turn  toward  Christ  when  money-making 
is  deemed  a  means  of  ministry  to  men.  Nothing 
to-day  is  more  heartening  than  the  defiance 
of  greed  which  the  growth  of  the  practice  of 
stewardship  implies.  Love  summons  the  Chris¬ 
tian  steward  to  “bring  the  best .  .  .  quickly,” 
even  for  Bolshevist  and  atheist,  and  all  re¬ 
jected  folk.  He  rejoices  if  with  muscle  and 
mind  and  money  he  can  further  humanity.  The 
reward  of  the  steward  is  that,  by  setting  God 
first,  he  gets  “a  close-up”  on  God.  The  pure  in 
heart  see  God !  They  appear  with  him  in  glory ! 

This,  then,  is  the  practical  issue  which 
every  person  must  face.  He  must  choose 
whether  he  will  be  ruled  by  the  content  or 
intent  of  life.  If  so  be  he  chooses  content, 

he  must  reckon  well  the  cost.  He  will  oppose 

60 


SOCIAL  CHRISTIANS 


his  living  to  his  life.  He  will  be  a  split  per¬ 
sonality,  but  unconscious  of  it.  Every  outlook 
of  his  life  will  therefore  be  distorted.  Social 
contacts  will  suffer  at  his  hands.  His  way  to 
God  will  be  barred.  If  he  seeks  for  the  intent 
of  life,  he  will  bless  life  with  brotherhood  and 
crown  life  with  God.  He  will  describe  his  out¬ 
look  on  life  with  words  that  echo  these: 

“Only  like  souls  I  see  the  folk  thereunder. 

Bound  who  should  conquer,  slaves  who  should 
be  kings. 

Hearing  their  one  hope  with  an  empty  wonder, 
Sadly  contented  with  a  show  of  things.  .  .  . 

“Then  with  a  rush  the  intolerable  craving 
Shivers  through  me  like  a  trumpet-call — 

O  to  save  these!  to  perish  for  their  saving. 

Die  for  their  life,  be  offered  for  them  all!”4 

A  vote  in  favor  of  stewardship  makes  one  a 
social  Christian;  that  one  can  be  Christian 
other  than  this  appears  unthinkable.  Those 
who  seek  what  life  contains  seek  an  alien  goal, 
and  thus  their  lives  lack,  at  every  point,  spir¬ 
itual  sensitiveness.  But  those  who  are  intent 
upon  the  reign  of  God  are  transformed  into  the 
spirit  and  mind  of  Christ.  Shall  your  Chris¬ 
tianity  be  selfish  or  be  social? 

4  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company  from  “Saint 
Paul,”  Collected  Poems,  p.  131,  by  Frederic  W.  H.  Myers. 

61 


“A  man  going  down  from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho 
fell  among  robbers  who  stripped  and  belabored 
him  and  then  went  off  leaving  him  half-dead.  Now 
it  so  chanced  that  a  priest  was  going  down  the 
same  road,  but  on  seeing  him  he  went  past  on  the 
opposite  side.  So  did  a  Levite  who  came  to  the 
spot;  he  looked  at  him  but  passed  on  the  opposite 
side.  However,  a  Samaritan  traveler  came  to  where 
he  was  and  felt  pity  when  he  saw  him;  he  went  to 
him,  bound  his  wounds  up,  pouring  oil  and  wine 
into  them,  mounted  him  on  his  own  steed,  took 
him  to  an  inn,  and  attended  to  him.  .  .  .  Which  of 
these  three  men,  in  your  opinion,  proved  a  neigh¬ 
bor  to  the  man  who  fell  among  the  robbers?” — Jesus. 

“Genuine  benevolence  is  invincible.” — Marcus 
Aurelius. 

“Give  all  thou  canst;  high  Heaven  rejects  the  lore 
Of  nicely-calculated  less  or  more.” 

— William  Wordsworth. 


62 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  TITHE  AND  STEWARDSHIP 


We  are  prone  to  substitute  an  act  for  an 
attitude.  Folks  are  not  social  Christians 
because  they  are  tithing  ones.  Stewardship 
goes  far  deeper.  In  the  “uprightness  of  its 
integrity”  it  must  state  the  truth,  at  what¬ 
ever  cost. 

Though  stewardship  concerns  our  possessions 
it  does  not  command  the  tithe.  If  you  become 
a  tither  for  the  sake  of  stewardship,  no  fault 
can  be  found  with  you.  But  if  you  think  of 
tithing  as  the  end  of  stewardship,  your  thought 
is  far  afield  from  the  spirit  and  mind  of  Christ. 
Tithing  may  be  an  expression  of  but  it  can 
never  be  a  substitute  for  stewardship.  Bishop 
McDowell  tells  of  a  man  who  boasted  because 
that  year  he  had  given  ten  thousand  dollars  to 
the  Christian  cause  and  kept  only  ninety 
thousand  for  himself!  Tithing  hurts  that  man, 
much  though  he  enjoys  it.  For  it  chloroforms 
his  conscience;  it  sidetracks  his  soul  from 
stewardship. 


63 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 

Tithing  has  been  extolled  as  the  biblical 
standard.  Texts  are  frequently  quoted  to 
show  that  there  were  three  tithes.  But  no 
one  is  able  to  say  whether  at  any  time  two¬ 
fold  or  threefold  tithing  was  regarded  as  the 
law,  although  scholars  are  convinced  that  in 
either  case  it  was  “merely  theoretical.” 

With  singular  unanimity  biblical  scholars 
agree  as  to  the  confusion  touching  the  tithe 
(see  the  Appendix  for  a  completer  putting  of 
the  facts). /  “The  data  at  our  disposal,”  says 
Dr.  Driver,  “do  not  enable  us  to  write  a  his¬ 
tory  of  the  tithe.”1  “The  laws  of  the  tithe 
conflict  remarkably  with  one  another,”  says 
Dr.  George  B.  Gray.2  And  another  authority 
asserts  that  concerning  the  tithe  “the  history 
among  the  Hebrews  is  far  from  clear.”3  And 
this  is  the  steadfast  testimony  of  all  eminent 
scholars.  That  in  the  face  of  this  men  should 
assert  for  the  tithe  binding  authority  seems 

incredible!  A  fair  perusal  of  Scripture  fails 
to  bear  out  their  claim.  No  standard  obliga¬ 
tion  is  indicated  there.  This  is  a  daring  thing 

1  Deuteronomy.  Charles  Scribner’s  Sons,  Publishers,  New  York  City. 

*  Critical  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament.  Charles  Scribner’s  Sons, 
Publishers,  New  York  City. 

*  The  Schaff -Herzog  Encyclopedia  of  Religion  and  Knowledge.  Funk  & 
Wagnalls  Company,  Publishers,  New  York  City. 

64 


THE  TITHE  AND  STEWARDSHIP 


to  say  in  the  face  of  the  frequent  claims  to  the 
contrary.  But  a  study  of  the  evidence  per¬ 
mits  one  to  say  nothing  else.  It  would  be 
strange,  of  course,  were  nothing  said  of  the 
tithe.  The  belief  that  man’s  resources  should 
be  placed  at  the  service  of  his  religion  is  as  old 
as  history ./  The  most  primitive  of  religionists 
sacrifice  and  make  offerings.  But  the  designa¬ 
tion  of  the  tenth  was  a  late  development. 
Political  and  economic  ideas  frequently  make 
their  way  into  religious  views.  So  with  the 
tithe.  There  was  a  widespread  custom  among 
ancient  peoples  of  paying  one  tenth  to  the 
king.  This  practice  existed  among  Greeks  and 
Romans,  Babylonians  and  Egyptians,  as  well 
as  among  the  Hebrews.  What  simpler  than  to 
honor  Deity  with  the  gifts  a  ruler  received? 
If  we  find  in  after  years  that  any  portion 
given  the  gods  is  called  by  the  name  of  the 
proportion  that  once  was  given  them,  we  need 
not  be  amazed.  (In  Muhammadan  law  the 
tithe  is  sometimes  one  half  or  one  fourth  of 
the  tenth.) 

The  early  Old-Testament  sources  mention 
the  bringing  of  the  firstfruits.  They  consisted 
of  a  mere  basketful.  But  in  the  later  codes, 

much  littered  with  confusions,  the  tithe  idea 

65 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


is  found.  It  is  sometimes  insistent,  but  seldom 
consistent.  Jacob  voluntarily  bargains  with 
his  deity  on  the  basis  of  the  tenth:  “Of  all 
that  thou  shalt  give  me  I  will  surely  give  the 
tenth,  to  thee.”  Many  years  later,  eight 
centuries  before  Christ,  Amos  seems  to  think 
of  it  in  terms  of  religious  dues:  “Bring  your 
sacrifices  every  morning  and  your  tithes  every 
three  days.”  Five  hundred  years  before  Christ, 
the  Ezra-Nehemiah  date,  the  demand  for  the 
tithe  stands  out:  “And  I  perceived  that  the 
portions  of  the  Levites  had  not  been  given 
them;  so  that  the  Levites  and  the  singers, 
that  did  the  work,  were  fled  every  one  to  his 
own  field.  Then  I  contended  with  the  rulers 
and  said,  Why  is  the  house  of  God  forsaken? 
And  I  gathered  them  together,  and  set  them 
in  their  place.  Then  brought  all  Judah  the 
tithe  of  the  grain  and  the  new  wine  and  the 
oil  unto  the  treasuries.  And  I  made  treasurers 
over  the  treasuries,  .  .  .  and  their  business  was 
to  distribute  unto  their  brethren.  Remember 
me,  O  my  God,  concerning  this,  and  wipe 
not  out  my  good  deeds  that  I  have  done  for 
the  house  of  my  God,  and  for  the  observances 
thereof.”  The  tithe  is  in  the  Old  Testament, 

but  it  is  not  the  only  thing  there.  It  is  not 

66 


THE  TITHE  AND  STEWARDSHIP 


the  exclusive  requirement.  There  were  other 
standards,  as  one  may  read  for  oneself  (see 
Lev.  23.  9-41;  Exod.  30.  11-16;  Num.  3.  44-51, 
and  similar  passages).  There  is  no  standard 
method.  And  even  if  there  were,  it  is  too  late 
in  the  day  for  anyone  to  attempt  to  hold  up 
thoughtful  people  at  the  point  of  a  text,  unless 
that  text  is  clearly  aligned  with  the  spirit  and 
truth  of  Christa  Those  who  stand  fast  in  the 
liberty  wherewith  Christ  hath  made  them  free 
will  never  believe  that  because  a  method  was 
once  expected  of  the  Jew  it  therefore  is  expected 
of  the  Christian.  Proof -texts  no  longer  have 
the  power  to  lord  it  over  us. 

Let  us  note  something  else  about  the  tithe. 
It  is  not  the  standard  method,  and  there  is 
no  standard  motive  that  accounts  for  it!  In 
the  fourteenth  chapter  of  Deuteronomy  we 
read  that  the  tithe  must  be  eaten  in  the  sacred 
place.  In  case  one  lived  too  far  to  convey  it 
conveniently,  he  could  change  it  into  money 
and  at  the  sacred  place  “thou  shalt  bestow 
that  money  for  whatsoever  thy  soul  lusteth 
after,  for  oxen,  or  for  sheep,  or  for  wine,  or  for 
strong  drink,  or  for  whatsoever  thy  soul  de- 
sireth:  and  thou  shalt  eat  there  before  the 

Lord  thy  God,  .  .  .  thou,  and  thine  household.” 

67 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


(A  kindly  editor  one  day  appended  a  post¬ 
script,  suggesting  that  the  Levites — the  re¬ 
ligious  workers — get  a  share  of  it!)  That  a 
deity  could  be  pleased  with  such  self-indulgence 
on  the  part  of  his  followers  seems  unbelievable 
now.  We  are  sure  that  the  God  and  Father 
of  our  Lord  would  not  have  it  so.  He  would 
be  happier  if  his  people  ascribed  to  him  as 
well  as  to  themselves  that  nobler  motive  for 
the  tithe  found  in  the  injunction  to  keep  it 
in  the  villages  and  towns  and  distribute  it 

among  the  poor.  That  would  be  more  like 

° _  A 

him.  The  eighteenth  of  Numbers  records  a 
motive  more  basic  still:  “And,  behold,  I  have 
given  the  children  of  Levi  all  the  tenth  in  Israel 
for  an  inheritance,  for  their  service  which  they 
serve,  even  the  service  of  the  tabernacle  of 
the  congregation.”  For  it  is  one  thing  to 
alleviate  poverty  and  quite  another  to  spir¬ 
itualize  a  nation.  Public  piety  will  root  pov¬ 
erty  up  and  out./  But  one  cannot  be  certain 
that  the  motive  credited  to  God  in  the 
“Priestly”  code  retains  his  respect  for  the 
tithe.  We  get  inklings  of  a  sordid  struggle 
for  the  possession  of  the  tithes  between  the 
priests  and  the  Levites/ The  priests  won  out 
and  the  record  reports  God  as  favoring  their 


THE  TITHE  AND  STEWARDSHIP 


side.  With  this  medley  of  motives  the  Old 
Testament  speaks  of  the  tithe!  There  is  no 
biblical  standard;  there  is  no  static  statute  on 
it.  The  Christian,  be  it  said  once  more,  looks 
at  the  Bible  through  Jesus,  and  v(i\l  own  no 
God  save  the  one  who  lived  in  him!  Thus  we 
know  that  he  is  no  longer  driving  money- 
bargains  with  Jacobs;  instead  he  is  driving 
out  those  who  try  so  to  bargain  with  him. 
We  will  not  believe  that  with  monev  we  can 

t/ 

bribe  the  God  of  the  race.  The  God  of  Amos 
answers  the  description  of  the  Father  of  Jesus 
Christ:  “Yea,  though  ye  offer  me  your  burnt- 
offerings  and  your  meal-offerings,  I  will  not 
accept  them;  neither  will  I  regard  the  peace- 
offerings  of  your  fat  beasts.  Take  thou  away 
from  me  the  noise  of  thy  songs;  for  I  will  not 
hear  the  melody  of  thy  viols.  But  let  judg¬ 
ment  run  down  as  waters,  and  righteousness 
as  a  mighty  stream.”  For  a  tithe  is  of.  value 
only  when  the  right  motive  is  back  of  it. 

It  was  with  the  motive  and  not  with  the 
method  that  Jesus  was  concerned.  (  Champions 
of  the  tithe  quote  with  much  approval  Christ’s 
mention  of  the  tithe  as  a  requirement  of  the 
law  which  existed  in  his  day;  but  it  seldom 

occurs  to  them  that  there  is  no  more  sugges- 

69 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


tion  of  approval  here  than  there  is  suggestion 
of  ridicule  in  his  story  of  the  Pharisee  who 
climaxed  his  prayer  with  the  boast,  “On  all 
my  income  I  pay  tithes.”  Indeed,  there  is 
less.  The  passage  is  worth  studying.  In  the 
language  of  Dr.  Weymouth,4  this  is  what  Jesus 
said:  “Alas  for  you.  Scribes  and  Pharisees, 
hypocrites,  for  you  pay  the  tithe  on  mint, 
dill  and  cumin,  while  you  have  neglected  the 
weightier  requirements  of  the  Law — just  judg¬ 
ment,  mercy,  and  faithful  dealing.  These 
things  you  ought  to  have  done,  and  yet  you 
ought  not  to  have  left  the  others  undone. 
You  blind  guides,  straining  out  the  gnat  while 
you  gulp  down  the  camel !  Alas  for  you,  Scribes 
and  Pharisees,  hypocrites,  for  you  wash  clean 
the  outside  of  the  cup  or  dish,  while  within 
they  are  full  of  greed  and  self-indulgence 
(uncurbed  animal  passions).”  Here  is  the 
picture:  “We  are  shown  the  man  polishing 
his  cup,  elaborately  and  carefully;  for  he  lays 
great  importance  on  the  cleanness  of  his  cup; 
but  he  forgets  to  clean  the  inside.  Most 
people  drink  from  the  inside,  but  the  Pharisee 
forgot  it,  dirty  as  it  was,  and  left  it  untouched. 

*  The  New  Testament  in  Modern  S-peech,  Richard  Francis  Weymouth. 
The  Pilgrim  Press,  Publishers,  Boston. 

70 


THE  TITHE  AND  STEWARDSHIP 


Then  he  sets  about  straining  what  he  is  going 
to  drink — another  elaborate  process;  he  holds  a 
piece  of  muslin  over  the  cup  and  pours  with 
care;  he  pauses — he  sees  a  mosquito;  he  has 
caught  it  in  time  and  flicks  it  away;  he  is  safe 
and  he  will  not  swallow  it.  And  then,  adds 
Jesus,  he  swallowed  a  camel.  How  many  of 
us  have  ever  pictured  the  process,  and  the 
series  of  sensations,  as  the  long,  hairy  neck 
slid  down  the  throat  of  the  Pharisee — all  that 
amplitude  of  loose-hung  anatomy — the  hump — 
two  humps — both  of  them  slid  down — and  he 
never  noticed — and  the  legs — all  of  them — 
with  whole  outfit  of  knees  and  big,  padded 
feet.  The  Pharisee  swallowed  a  camel — and 
never  noticed  it.”5  To  cull  from  this  master¬ 
ful  statement  one  phrase:  “These  things  you 
ought  to  have  done,”  as  an  indorsement  of 
tithing  per  se  shows  how  slow  of  heart  we  are 
to  understand.  By  what  peculiar  twist  of  logic 
can  a  commendation  of  a  deed  be  made  into 
the  recommendation  of  a  percentage?  He  was 
discussing  their  condition  rather  than  their 
law.  They  neglected  the  great  for  the  small, 
because  their  vision  was  dull  and  their  taste 

-  I 

5  The  Jesus  of  History,  by  T.  R.  Glover.  Association  Press,  Publishers, 
New  York  City. 


71 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


awry!  They  were  punctilious  about  tithing, 
while  weightier  matters  went  by  the  board. 
It  is,  rather,  as  if  Jesus  had  said:  “What  you 
need  is  not  a  law  of  'proportion  but  a  sense  of 
proportion /” 

Christ’s  attitude  toward  money  admits  of 
no  legalism.  The  Pharisees  took  pride  in  their 
pious  proportioning.  But  Jesus  saw  that 
their  careful  casuistry  fostered  ethical  dualism. 
They  scrupulously  set  apart  a  tenth  of  the 
tiny  kitchen  herbs,  and  then  devoured  widows’ 
houses  despite  their  long  prayers.  Tithing 
itself  is  not  Christian;  only  the  viewpoint  of 
Jesus  can  ever  make  it  so.  Jesus  has  a  dis¬ 
quieting  habit  of  thinking  in  totality.  His 
mind  always  unified  concepts.  He  saw  things 
steadily  and  he  saw  them  whole.  He  knew 
that  our  hearts  and  our  treasures  keep  steady 
company.  He  does  not  get  us  until  he  gets 
ours.  Hence  the  testing  exaction  placed  upon 
the  fine  young  man  who  had  always  kept  the 
law:  “Sell  all  you  have;  give  the  money  to  the 
poor  and  you  will  have  treasure  in  heaven; 
then  come,  take  up  the  cross,  and  follow  me.” 
This  command  proved  too  much  for  the  youth; 
it  makes  us  squirm  to-day!  It  is,  alas!  not 

true  that  a  fool  and  his  money  are  soon  parted; 

72 


THE  TITHE  AND  STEWARDSHIP 


a  fool  and  his  money  stay  close.  When  Zac- 
chaeus,  head  of  taxgatherers,  made  the  promise: 
“I  will  give  the  half  of  all  I  have.  Lord,  to  the 
poor,  and  if  I  have  cheated  anybody  I  will 
give  him  back  four  times  as  much,”  Christ 
perceived  at  once  that  salvation  had  come  to 
that  house.  Suppose  now  that  Zacchaeus  had 
promised  to  pay  the  tithe!  Would  that  have 
burst  Christ’s  enthusiasm  into  conflagration? 
Let  a  man  catch  Christ’s  conviction  about  life 
and  at  once  his  percentage  shifts  from  the 
basis  of  a  rule  to  the  basis  of  ability;  nay,  to 
the  basis  of  love.  This  accounts  for  the  shout 
of  triumph  that  leaped  from  the  lips  of  our 
Lord  one  day  as  “he  watched  the  people  putting 
their  money  into  the  treasury.  A  number  of 
the  rich  were  putting  in  large  sums;  but  a  poor 
widow  came  up  and  put  in  two  little  coins 
amounting  to  a  halfpenny.  And  he  called  his 
disciples  and  said  to  them,  T  tell  you  truly, 
this  poor  widow  has  put  in  more  than  all  who 
have  put  their  money  into  the  treasury;  for 
they  have  all  put  in  their  contribution  out  of 
their  surplus,  but  she  has  given  out  of  her 
neediness  all  she  possessed,  her  whole  living.’  ” 
If  we  have  ears  to  hear,  we  know  that  he  still 
invites  our  attention  to  such  impractical  per- 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


sons  to-day.  But  many  are  reluctant  to  listen; 
it  is  discomfiting  and  we  must  keep  sane.  .  .  . 
It  is  expensive  to  be  an  expansive  soul.  But 
since  we  must  be  religious,  we  compromise  on 
the  tithe!  That  pleases  God  and  does  not 
hurt  the  “middle-class”  citizens’  comfort.  Thus 
we  choke  on  the  mosquito  and  gulp  down  the 
camel,  while  once  again 

“  .  .  .  upon  the  Tree, 

Christ’s  wounds  break  in  fresh  agony.”6 

The  tithe  as  a  legalistic  requirement  is  alien 
to  the  spirit  of  Christ.  The  subsequent  history 
of  the  tithe  is  unsavory.  Space  does  not 
permit  its  full  recital  here.  A  reference  or  two 
must  suffice.  In  the  early  church  the  custom 
of  consecrating  to  religious  purposes  a  tenth 
of  the  income  was  voluntary.  It  was  made 
obligatory  by  the  Council  of  Tours  (567)  and 
the  second  Council  of  Macon  (585)  enjoined 
its  payment  under  pains  of  excommunication. 
Charlemagne  extended  the  practice  to  all  of 
his  domain.  The  Popes,  whose  business  acumen 
was  usually  far  superior  to  their  spiritual  con¬ 
cern,  welcomed  with  open  arms  this  effective 

6  “The  Churches.”  The  Vision  Splendid,  by  John  Oxenham,  Copyright, 
1917.  George  H.  Doran  Company,  Publishers. 

74 


THE  TITHE  AND  STEWARDSHIP 


method  of  financial  buttressing.  Where  papal 
power  waned  the  clergy  were  nothing  loath 
to  avail  themselves  of  it.  Things  came  to 
such  a  pass  in  England  that  when  a  peasant 
died  the  priest  would  visit  the  home,  not  to 
comfort  the  bereaved,  but  to  claim  the  best 
cow  and  the  coverlet  of  the  bed,  or  to  collect 
the  deceased’s  outer  garment!  The  church,  or, 
rather,  the  clergy  became  holders  of  property 
of  immense  value  in  consequence  of  the  tithe. 
Because  of  this,  probably  more  than  because  of 
the  spiritual  influence,  they  came  to  a  large  share 
of  political  power.  One  could  write  an  interest¬ 
ing  thesis  on  the  proposition  that  the  social 
gospel  was  prevented  from  coming  to  expression 
by  the  wealth  the  clergy  had.  Read  how  in 
France  (in  the  Estates  General  of  1789)  the 
clergy  joined  hands  with  the  nobility  to  defeat 
the  “third  estate,”  though  this  proved  a  case 
where  the  worm  turned  in  resistless  wrath. 
Not  infrequently  the  church,  with  its  financial 
prowess,  humbled  governments.  One  cause  for 
the  Reformation  was  the  wish  of  States  to  get 
free  from  the  domination  the  church  was  able 
to  impose  by  its  economic  strength.  Yet  not 
even  the  Reformation  could  remove  the  blight. 

In  Protestant  countries  the  tax  for  the  clergy 

75 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


continued,  and  the  basis  was  usually  the  tithe.7 
A  study  of  the  4 ‘state”  churches  is  illuminating 
as  to  the  financial  opportunism  of  their  leaders, 
whatever  the  creed  they  confessed.  Not  until 
1869  were  tithes  totally  abolished  in  England 
under  the  Disestablishment  Act.  It  is  con¬ 
ceivable,  of  course,  that  the  tithe  might  have 
gone  to  good  purposes  instead  of  for  the 
aggrandizement  of  the  leaders  of  the  church. 
The  abuse  of  the  tithe  does  not  argue  the 
injustice  of  paying  it.  The  point  we  are  making, 
however,  is  that  those  who  talk  of  the  tithe 
as  a  “historic  revelation”  of  the  will  of  God 
will  find  history  laughing  at  them! 

It  might  also  be  argued  that  the  tithe  idea 
works  considerable  damage  to-day.  But  thus 
far  our  train  of  thought  has  been  largely 
negative.  It  will  be  conducive  to  healthy 
mindedness  if  we  resort  to  the  positive  now. 
There  is  hope  for  the  tithe!  Thousands  of 
devout  people  practice  the  giving  of  it.  They 
do  so  in  high  devotion  to  the  democracy  of 
God.  They  believe  that  the  church  has  a 
program  through  which  the  world  can  be 

7  The  point  was  hardly  anywhere  made  that  the  exaction  of  the  tithe 
is  reprehensible.  Only  the  Anabaptists  in  Switzerland  asserted  that 
Christians  owed  no  tithes.  Luther  held  that  tithes  should  be  paid  to  the 
temporal  sovereigns. 


76 


THE  TITHE  AND  STEWARDSHIP 


saved.  In  the  presence  of  those  fine  souls 
whose  income  is  below  normal,  and  who  yet 
out  of  their  necessity  contribute  a  tenth  to 
God’s  work,  it  behooves  every  thoughtful 
person  to  uncover  his  head  and  be  reverent. 
The  world  is  getting  better  because  it  is  giving 
better.  Tithing  has  been  overrated,  but  it  is 
quite  possible  to  underrate  it  too.  It  has  a 
practical  aspect  which  no  one  can  gainsay. 
The  church’s  work  abroad  and  at  home  would 
fail  if  these  multitudes  ceased  their  payment 
of  the  tithe.  Were  thousands  of  others  to 
begin  tithing  now,  the  church  would  receive 
an  impetus  that  would  cheer  the  heart  of  God. 
What  might  not  happen  in  this  world  were 
all  Christians  to  give  the  tenth  of  their  income 
for  a  single  generation?  Given  systematic 
support,  the  church  can  belt  the  globe  with 
the  good  news  of  its  Lord.  Tithing  to  this 
purpose  has  a  glory  that  cannot  be  dimmed! 
At  least  with  one  tenth  of  one’s  income  one 
thus  does  the  Christian  thing.  Some  protest 
against  tithing  because  they  do  not  wish  to 
give  so  much  to  the  church  or  to  any  cause. 
Their  protests  reek  to  heaven.  There  are 
people  who  never  voluntarily  peruse  any  tale 
of  sacrifice,  whose  ears  never  willingly  admit 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


speech  on  generosity.  They  deem  themselves 
too  practical  to  be  so  sentimental.  They  hold 
it  better  to  receive  than  to  give.  Their  ail¬ 
ment  is  enlargement  of  the  acquisitive  instinct, 
which,  being  interpreted,  is  ensmallment  of 
the  soul.  The  walls  of  stinginess,  erected  for 
self-protection,  treacherously  shut  out  the 
breath  of  life,  so  that  the  soul  starves  long 
before  the  body  does.  In  the  temple  of  the 
spirit,  where  song  and  service  should  companion 
life,  only  the  blasphemy  of  greed  resounds  by 
day  and  night! 

“But  shop  each  day  and  all  night  long! 

Friend,  your  good  angel  slept;  your  star 
Suffered  eclipse;  fate  did  you  wrong! 

From  where  these  sort  of  treasures  are 
There  should  our  hearts  be:  Christ,  how  far!” 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  for  people  in 
moderate  circumstances  this  percentage  pro¬ 
vides  a  working  basis  for  benevolence — though 
not  a  rigid  rule.  Indeed,  one  might  go  further. 
After  a  pastorate  of  several  years  in  an  indus¬ 
trial  group,  the  writer  cannot  recall  a  single 
instance  of  a  person  tithing  for  a  reasonable 
period  of  time  to  whom  it  did  not  prove  of 

genuine  benefit!  Always  there  is  a  new  joy 

78 


THE  TITHE  AND  STEWARDSHIP 


and  a  new  thrift:  joy  in  the  consciousness  of 
self-denial  for  an  unselfish  cause;  thrift  from 
the  living  within  one’s  income  which  such 
sacrifice  begets.  To  be  sure 

“  .  .  .  thrift  itself 

May  be  a  sort  of  slow,  unwholesome  fire, 

That  eats  away  to  dust  the  life  that  feeds  it.”8 

But  that  occurs  when  thrift  means  the  selfish¬ 
ness  that  keeps,  not  when  thrift  means  the 
sacrifice  that  spends.  That  people  “make 
money”  on  tithing  is  easy  to  understand. 
In  the  truest  sense  of  the  word,  the  habit 
makes  them  thrifty.  It  is  this  latter  fact  that 
makes  people  say  that  they  make  money  on 
tithing.  Who,  then,  shall  make  bold  to  advise 
people  against  it?  One  may  well  hesitate  to 
devote  less  than  this  proportion  for  the  pur¬ 
pose  of  maintaining  and  increasing  the  effi¬ 
ciency  of  the  church  and  other  agencies  for  the 
social  good.  Since  for  the  educating  of  chil¬ 
dren,  concepts  must  be  made  concrete,  the 
tenth  may  well  serve  as  an  example  and  as  a 
basis  of  their  support  of  altruistic  work.  But 
the  tithe  becomes  a  danger  if  it  leaves  us  too  much 

8  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company  from  Collected 
Poems,  by  Edwin  Arlington  Robinson. 

79 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


for  ourselves.  More  than  six  per  cent  of  the 
people  in  the  United  States  receive  an  annual 
income  of  three  thousand  dollars  or  over.  The 
large  proportion  of  this  six  per  cent  is  within 
the  Christian  Church.  All  things  being  equal, 
this  is  sufficiently  in  excess  of  the  “standard 
wage”  for  the  average  family,  to  make  some 
proportion  larger  than  the  tenth  the  fair 
share  of  support  of  Christ’s  cause.  But  neither 
a  church  nor  a  creed  has  the  right  to  dictate 
the  basis.  The  service  the  tithe  performs  is 
that  of  a  working  basis  for  the  most  of  us. 
It  is  the  practical  safeguard  which  we  impose 
upon  ourselves  to  protect  the  finances  of  the 
Kingdom.  Of  course  there  are  dangers.  Some 
preach  tithing,  or  practice  it,  on  the  basis  of 
the  dividends  it  will  yield.  Tithing  thus 
becomes  acquisitive  rather  than  altruistic. 
Tithing  sometimes  fosters  a  sense  of  self- 
righteousness.  It  comes  to  be  regarded  as  an 
end  and  not  a  means.  But  the  larger  con¬ 
ception  of  stewardship,  which  we  try  to  study 
here,  will  save  us  from  these  snares. 

If  there  is  hope  for  the  tithe,  there  is  also 
hope  for  the  tither.  Even  though  he  began 
his  habit  in  response  to  some  wild  advocacy 

of  legalism,  he  need  not  tarry  on  that  level. 

80 


THE  TITHE  AND  STEWARDSHIP 


A  low  motive  often  proves  the  gateway  to  a 
high  one.  Most  of  us  started  school  just  be¬ 
cause  we  had  to,  while  to-day  we  study  for  the 
love  of  it.  If  we  started  to  tithe,  from  fear  of 
breaking  God’s  law,  or  even  for  its  heralded 
returns,  we  may  henceforth  give  for  the  sake 
of  saviourhood!  One  had  better  err  on  the 
side  of  generosity  than  against  it.  But  once 
the  error  is  evident  we  should  forthwith  walk 
in  the  light. 

The  chapter  should  not  conclude  until  men¬ 
tion  has  been  made  of  the  habit  of  giving  the 
major  portion  of  one’s  proportion  to  the  church 
itself.  This  is  justifiable,  because  the  church 
can  be  trusted  now!  This  does  not  mean,  of 
course,  that  all  of  its  agents  can.  Glaring 
exceptions  can  be  found.  In  connectional 
bodies,  “district  superintendents,”  secretaries, 
and  others  are  likely  to  judge  a  church  by  the 
money  it  raises  instead  of  the  work  it  does. 
Accordingly,  such  worthies  pay  appropriate 
homage  to  pastors  and  to  churches  where  the 
funds  abound,  but  they  have  scant  love  for 
the  churches  that  fail  in  the  quotas  desired. 
But  the  church  at  large  can  be  trusted.  It 
now  realizes  that  it  is  in  business  not  to  receive 

money  but  to  interpret  it,  not  to  collect  property 

81 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


but  to  correct  life.  But  this  very  interpretation 
requires  money  and  much  of  it.  It  is  for  this 
reason  that  such  financial  stress  has  been  laid 
in  the  campaigns  of  recent  years.  On  the 
whole,  the  results  have  been  wholesome.  Our 
financial  achievements — and  greater  are  on 
the  way — have  startled  us  into  a  consciousness 
of  our  potentialities.  We  feel  acclimated  to 
the  Herculean.  We  realize  that  our  time  and 
talent,  our  treasure  and  thought,  have  the 
right  to  giant  tasks.  It  is  now  a  popular 
pastime  to  banish  the  word  “failure”  from 
our  vocabulary.  We  have  had  a  rebirth  of 
confidence.  If  contributions  do  not  now  come 
in  as  fast  as  they  should,  this  is  due,  not  to 
inability  but  to  ignorance  of  the  work  and 
the  need.  We  have  set  out  with  great  eclat 
and  with  much  heraldry  upon  our  evangelistic 
heritage;  and  we  dare  not  fail.  This  is  worth 
while;  nothing  is  more  worth  while! 

And  now  let  us  summarize  what  we  have 
discussed  thus  far.  We  have  seen  that  fre¬ 
quently  stewardship  has  been  confused  with 
tithing.  Extravagant  claims  have  been  made 
on  behalf  of  the  tithe.  These  claims  are  not 
sustained  by  Scripture  or  history.  The  tithe 

as  a  working  basis  for  the  support  of  Chris- 

82 


THE  TITHE  AND  STEWARDSHIP 


tian  work  has  wrought  enormous  good.  But 
tithing,  by  itself,  is  not  stewardship.  It  may 
be  the  expression,  but  also  the  repression,  of 
our  sense  of  stewardship.  It  may  be  a  sop  to 
conscience  or  it  may  be  a  work  of  love.  What 
it  is  depends  totally  upon  what  our  steward¬ 
ship  means.  To  the  mission  of  stewardship, 
then,  let  us  next  give  thought. 


83 


‘‘The  Realm  of  heaven  is  like  treasure  hidden 
in  a  field;  the  man  who  finds  it  hides  it  and  in  his 
delight  goes  and  sells  all  he  possesses  and  buys 
that  field. 

“Again,  the  Realm  of  heaven  is  like  a  trader  in 
search  of  fine  pearls;  when  he  finds  a  single  pearl 
of  high  price,  he  is  off  to  sell  all  he  possesses  and 
buy  it.” — Jesus . 

“  To  forget 

For  this  large  prodigality  of  gold 
That  larger  generosity  of  thought — 

These  are  the  fleshly  clogs  of  human  greed, 
The  fundamental  blunders  of  mankind.” 

— Edward  Arlington  Robinson.1 

“The  idea  of  the  moral  law  is  being  replaced  by 
the  idea  of  the  moral  end.  This  moral  end  is  the 
common  good,  of  which  goodness  is  not  the  only 
element,  although  the  most  valuable,  for  it  includes 
all  the  higher  interests  of  a  society.  The  common 
good  cannot  be  separated  from,  as  it  is  dependent 
on  the  total  conditions — physical,  economic,  social, 
political — that  affect  the  peril  or  security,  the 
misery  or  prosperity,  the  weal  or  woe  of  the  society.” 
— Alfred  E.  Garvie.2 

1  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  “Octaves” 
Collected  Poems,  p.  107,  by  Edwin  Arlington  Robinson. 

2  The  Purpose  of  God  in  Christ,  p.  65,  Alfred  E.  Garvie.  Hodder  and 
Stoughton,  Publishers,  New  York. 


84 


CHAPTER  V 

STEWARDSHIP  AND  PROPERTY 

There  is  but  one  gospel.  We  often  speak  of 
two.  But  even  when  we  do,  it  is  to  emphasize 
their  oneness.  For  years  the  gospel  was  applied 
to  the  individual.  But  persons,  like  texts, 
are  not  good  if  detached :  their  setting  accounts 
for  their  worth.  “No  man  liveth  unto  him¬ 
self.”  He  stands  related  to  others  and  to  all. 
He  must  act  toward  the  society  that  acts 
upon  him.  Hence  we  speak  of  the  social 
gospel.  But  neither  the  individualistic  gospel 
nor  the  social  gospel  is  the  gospel  by  itself. 
It  requires  the  two  sides  for  the  one  gospel. 
The  gospel  is  the  good  news  of  the  reign  of 
God.  It  can  never  be  anything  else.  No  one 
and  nothing  is  excluded  from  this  reign.  The 
God  of  personality  is  the  God  of  society. 
Every  realm  must  own  him  Lord. 

The  gospel  proclaims  that  property  must 
promote  personality.  Stewardship  does  with 
property  what  the  gospel  asks.  Stewardship 

is  the  practice  of  property  for  the  purposes  of 

85  1 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


God .  If  you  prefer  sociological  language  to 
this  theological  phrase,  stewardship  is  the 
functional,  rather  than  the  acquisitive,  use  of 
property.  But  perhaps  it  is  better  still  to  put 
it  into  words  that  admit  of  no  doubt.  Stew¬ 
ardship  is  the  Christian  use  of  things.  Superior 
definitions  may  suggest  themselves.  What  is 
important  to  remember  about  it  is  that  steward¬ 
ship  is  the  act  of  a  Christian  attitude;  that  it 
is  the  conduct  of  Christian  character  concern¬ 
ing  possessions.  It  is  not  merely  a  question 
of  how  much  of  our  money  we  give  to  the 
church.  To  be  sure,  it  involves  this  question. 
But  far  more  is  involved.  Stewardship  is  the 
ethic  of  the  gospel  as  regards  property. 

Notice  that  the  words  “property”  and 
“possessions”  are  used  interchangeably.  Will 
not  this  lead  to  confusion?  There  is  a  deal  of 
property  that  is  not  in  our  possession.  What 
have  we  to  do  with  that?  It  is  one  thing  to 
say  that  stewardship  should  apply  to  “my” 
property.  But  how  can  one  make  a  Christian 
use  of  things  he  does  not  possess?  More  will 
be  said  about  this  question  in  another  place. 
But  a  moment’s  reflection  will  remind  us  that 
we  use  many  things  we  do  not  own.  We 

either  pay  for  their  use,  or  in  other  ways  we 

86 


STEWARDSHIP  AND  PROPERTY 


influence  their  power  and  their  value.  How, 
then,  shall  we  exempt  this  from  the  range 
of  our  stewardship?  An  idea,  said  William 
James,  becomes  true  when  it  fits  into  the 
totality  of  our  experience.  Stewardship  fits 
into  property  wherever  it  touches  our  lives. 

But  when  we  speak  of  property,  complicated 
questions  come.  A  definition  covering,  or, 
what  is  more  important,  uncovering,  all  the 
facts  is  difficult  to  find.  It  requires  thought 
to  learn  what  may  properly  be  called  property. 
To  confine  property  to  “matter”  might  once 
have  sufficed.  But  it  cannot  in  our  day.  Just 
where  lies  the  line  of  demarkation  between 
matter  and  mind,  and  whether  there  is  such 
a  line,  are  headache-provoking  questions  philos¬ 
ophers  revel  in.  At  present  the  biologists 
seem  to  be  battering  down  “the  middle  wall 
of  partition”  between  matter  and  life.  By 
the  invasion  of  the  electron  the  ground  has 
been  cut  from  under  old-line  atheism.  We 
have  moved  from  a  static  to  a  dynamic  view 
of  things.  Or,  to  speak  more  accurately,  we 
are  so  moving. 

There  are  times  when  property  is  unrecog¬ 
nized  as  such.  Until  very  recently,  our  coke 

makers  ignorantly  wasted  “on  the  desert  air” 

87 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


some  seven  hundred  thousand  tons  of  am¬ 
monium  salts  each  year.  They  did  not  know 
the  value  of  their  waste.  Many  things  once 
“cast  as  rubbish  to  the  void”  are  now  put 
to  our  service.  Sometimes  what  is  clearly 
property  is  not  thought  of  as  such.  What 
do  we  own  more  certainly  than  these  bodies 
of  ours,  and  what  is  there  in  regard  to  which 
we  need  stewardship  more?  We  need  to 
remember  and  never  forget  that  these  bodies 
are  God’s  bodies;  he  owns  them;  we  possess 
them.  It  is  a  sobering  reflection  that  we  are 
all  and  always  living  in  God’s  house.  God 
does  not  always  serve  writs  to  eject  us  when 
we  defile  it.  We  dwell  in  the  house  of  the 
Lord  by  dwelling  in  these  bodies  and  all  too 
frequently  we  prove  undesirable  tenants!  Yet 
when  we  speak  of  property  we  do  not  usually 
include  our  bodies.  We  have  fallen  into  the 
habit  of  serious  omissions  in  our  talk  of 
property. 

Since  stewardship  has  such  vast  concern 
with  property,  we  must  guard  against  one¬ 
sided  discussions  of  it.  Harvey  Reeves  Cal¬ 
kins,  whose  book  A  Man  and  His  Money  is 
monumental  in  the  history  of  the  stewardship 

movement,  says:  “Property  and  wealth  do 

88 


STEWARDSHIP  AND  PROPERTY 


not  inhere  in  land  or  houses  or  crops  or  mer¬ 
chandise,  but  in  something  else  that  has  neither 
form  nor  substance,  yet  has  immense  power 
to  influence  these  material  things.  Some 
invisible  element  touches  property  and  it 
stands  upon  its  feet,  it  moves  and  throbs  with 
life;  but  when  that  element  is  withdrawn 
property  falls  back  again,  a  dead  and  inert 
thing.  That  invisible  element  is  value.  It 
cannot  be  fully  defined  nor  wholly  analyzed; 
it  can  only  be  observed  in  its  effects,  and  the 
manner  of  its  working  remembered.  Value 
in  property  is  like  life  in  a  man,  like  music  in 
a  harp,  like  steam  in  a  cylinder,  like  electricity 
in  a  coil  of  wire.  ...  Not  dead  things,  what¬ 
soever  they  are,  but  the  vital  element  that 
moves  them — this  is  property.  When  that 
vital  element  departs  property  ceases.  The 
essence  of  property  is  value.”  Now  it  is  a  good 
thing  to  be  reminded  of  the  value  in  property. 
We  have  not  thought  of  it  enough.  But,  in 
order  to  do  so,  it  is  not  necessary  for  us  to 
forget  the  value  of  property.  There  must  be 
land  before  there  can  be  land-value.  Value 
depends  on  possibilities.  You  cannot  use 
stones  for  bread  or  chloroform  for  molasses. 

True,  there  are  values  apart  from  things.  In 

89 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


many  respects  religion  is  value.  In  the  deeper 
realms  of  life  are  values  things  do  not  touch. 
This  is  the  subtle  truth  suggested  in  the  pun 
that  preachers  are  poor  but  well-connected. 
There  are  values  apart  from  things.  But 
apart  from  things  there  is  no  property.  Prop¬ 
erty  always  means  material  things  available  for 
satisfying  human  wants.  We  emphasize  this 
fact  when  we  use  the  term  property- value. 
Once  note  that  property  is  things,  and  it  is 
perfectly  in  order  to  say  that  property  has 
value.  We  could  never  know  the  value  of 
things  unless  we  had  value  and  things.  They 
are  inseparable  in  property.  United  they 
stand,  divided  they  fall.  All  this  has  bearing 
on  stewardship.  The  church  deals  in  values. 
But  it  cannot  deal  justly  with  them  until  it 
relates  them  to  things. 

Attempt  to  translate  property  in  personal 
terms  and  such  a  statement  as  Professor  Ely’s, 
that  property  is  “an  exclusive  right  to  con¬ 
trol  an  economic  good”  may  stand  you  in  good 
stead.  Only  remember  to  cross-examine  this 
word  “exclusive.”  For  it  is  always  within 
limitations  that  a  person  has  freedom  of  control 
over  things.  These  limitations  sometimes  in¬ 
here  in  the  things  and  at  other  times  in  the 

90 


STEWARDSHIP  AND  PROPERTY 


values  placed  upon  them.  It  is  just  these 
limitations  into  which  we  must  inquire.  Mean¬ 
while  let  us  note  that  freedom  of  control  does 
not  mean  license. 

But  it  is  not  enough  to  know  what  property 
may  be  or  what  may  be  done  with  it.  The 
Christian  is  concerned  with  what  property 
ought  to  do;  with  the  function  of  property. 
It  was  Jesus’  habit  to  trace  things  to  their 
origin.  The  religionists  of  his  day  were  stran¬ 
gers  to  this  scientific  bent  of  mind.  They 
went  back  to  tradition,  to  custom  or  sacred 
law.  But  Jesus  went  back  to  God.  Seen 
through  the  eyes  of  Jesus,  things  all  run  back 
to  God.  One  hesitates  to  say  that  God  is 
the  owner  of  all  things  when  one  remembers 
the  bayonet  and  whisky  and  the  roulette 
wheel,  or  that  innumerable  host  of  “practical” 
things  that  have  the  form  of  decency  but 
deny  the  power  thereof.  But  to  Christian 
thought  these  things  are  man’s  perversions  of 
God’s  property.  Property  is  God’s;  this  is 
the  Christian  insistence,  and  from  it  there 
is  no  escape.  Since  the  doctrine  of  evolution 
has  brought  home  to  us  the  immanence  of 
God,  we  can  never  again  think  of  property 
in  a  pagan  way: 


91 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


“Draw  if  thou  canst,  the  mystic  line. 

Severing  rightly  his  from  thine, 

Which  is  human,  which  divine.” 

If  the  transcendence  of  God  leaves  us  unmoved 
as  to  stewardship,  his  immanence  ought  to 
startle  us.  Shall  we  use  the  expression  of 
God  for  the  suppression  of  his  will?  “The 
earth  is  the  Lord’s  and  the  fullness  thereof,” 
and  “property  in  outward  goods  is  but  the 
outcome  of  personality;  and  all  human  per¬ 
sonality  is  the  issue  and  image  of  the  per¬ 
sonality  of  God.  .  .  .  Man’s  authority  to  say 
of  anything  ‘That  is  mine,’  rests  finally  upon 
his  power  to  say  T  am  God’s.’  ”*  The  fact 
of  God’s  absolute  ownership  is  fundamental 
to  stewardship. 

Now,  when  a  man  awakes  to  the  truth  that 
he  is  a  trustee  of  God's  goods ,  it  at  once  be¬ 
comes  clear  to  him  what  his  property  ought 
to  do.  For  one  thing,  he  sees  that  his  property 
should  truthfully  represent  God .  It  must  cast 
no  reflection  upon  his  character.  When  a 
man’s  money  creates  the  impression  that 
God  plays  favorites,  it  belies  the  conception 
of  God  as  “no  respecter  of  persons.”  When 

1  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company  from  Property, 
Its  Duties  and  Rights,  Essays  by  Various  Authors. 

92 


STEWARDSHIP  AND  PROPERTY 


a  man  so  uses  his  money  that  for  some  of  his 
brothers  and  sisters  life  is  a  burdened  existence 
rather  than  the  joyous  experience  which  Jesus 
said  God  means,  his  money  lies  about  God. 
When  property,  in  whatever  hands,  fails  to 
bear  clear  testimony  as  to  the  loving  father¬ 
liness  of  the  Creator  for  all  his  creatures,  that 
property  is  a  power  of  darkness  and  smites 
God  in  the  face.  For  it  then  misrepresents 
God.  You  do  not  wonder,  do  you,  that  some 
hide  from  stewardship  behind  the  skirt  of 
legalistic  tithing?  Stewardship  is  a  searchlight 
under  which  the  selfish  wince.  What  is  more 
difficult  to  understand  is  why  “A  Dictionary 
of  Religion  and  Ethics  ,”  written  by  modern 
men,  should  not  mention  it  at  all.  For  a  man 
to  ask  of  his  holdings  that  they  tell  the  truth 
about  God  is  an  “impractical”  exercise  in  which 
Christians  may  indulge  to  the  welfare  of  their 
souls.  At  any  rate,  nothing  short  of  this  is 
really  stewardship.  For  another  thing,  he  who 
practices  stewardship  must  see  to  it  that  his 
property  works  the  will  of  God.  Here  again  is 
a  subject  that  can  only  be  touched  upon  here. 
If  the  heavenly  Father  desires  that  the  chil¬ 
dren  under  his  reign  shall  receive  more  abun¬ 
dant  life,  what  shall  we  say  for  property  that 

93 


DEEPER  MEANING  OE  STEWARDSHIP 


stunts  personality  and  makes  life  a  mere 
battle  for  food?  And  with  what  acclaim  shall 
we  greet  those  whose  goods  work  humanity 
good!  Moreover,  the  trustee  of  God’s  goods 
will  not  misrepresent  his  trusteeship .  He  will 
remember  the  limited  character  of  his  pro¬ 
prietorship.  To  be  sure,  taxation  and  law 
exist  to  keep  him  in  mind  of  this.  Yet  despite 
these  a  surprising  number  go  on  the  bland 
assumption  of  possessive  autocracy.  The  stew¬ 
ard  of  God  will  not  clamor  “to  do  what  I  will 
with  mine  own.”  His  liberty  to  control  things 
can  never  turn  into  license.  He  will  be  wary 
of  the  popular  prattle  of  “property  rights,” 
knowing  full  well  that  rights  are  subservient 
to  right,  and  that  things  must  not  hold  sway 
over  personality.  He  will  know  that  what 
he  owns  he  owes  to  God,  in  creation  and  his¬ 
tory.  And  the  trustee  of  God’s  goods  will 
think  more  of  God  than  of  goods .  Nonstewards, 
who  never  can  hope  to  be  much  more  than 
paganized  Christians,  emulate  their  progenitors 
by  seeking  chiefly  what  God  has.  At  best 
their  thought  soars  to  God’s  power.  So,  when 
they  get  into  a  bad  fix,  they  invoke  the  power 
of  heaven  to  help  them  out  of  it.  When  they 
receive  a  smash-up  from  a  collision  with  some 


STEWARDSHIP  AND  PROPERTY 


giant  sin,  they  send  out  an  alarm  that  the 
wrecking  crew  of  the  universe  may  be  rushed 
to  the  scene.  They  call  that  prayer.  It  stands 
to  reason  that  God  desires  our  interest  in  his 
things.  All  that  the  heavenly  Father  has  is 
at  the  disposal  of  his  children.  An  earthly 
father,  said  Jesus,  delights  to  give  good  things 
to  his  children — how  much  more  your  Father. 
Said  Paul:  All  things  are  yours.  But  though  a 
steward  is  interested  in  the  things  God  has, 
the  center  of  his  interest  is  in  what  God  is. 
That  God  reveals  himself  in  things  has  long 
been  a  commonplace.  We  talk  of  the  God  of 
nature  and  do  well  so  to  talk  of  him.  The 
steward  sees  that  God  can  reveal  himself 
through  property.  He  is  only  prevented  from 
doing  so  by  our  selfishness.  Just  yet,  while 
“the  heavens  declare  his  glory,”  the  earth 
fails  “to  show  forth  his  handiwork,”  for  no 
good  God  would  distort  his  property  into 
instruments  that  impoverish  the  many  and 
unduly  enrich  the  few.  Our  money  must 
show  us  God,  to  paraphrase  Mr.  Britling. 
Just  yet  our  money  talks  in  tones  of  acquis¬ 
itiveness.  The  Christian  steward  desires  it 
to  speak  in  accents  of  saviourhood.  He  wants 
property  to  articulate  the  Personality  at  the 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


heart  of  the  universe.  Some  property  is  already 
utilized  to  do  this  in  whole  or  in  part.  If 
hospitals,  churches,  schools,  and  homes  voice 
God,  property  everywhere  must  come  to  pro¬ 
claim  him.  The  trustee  of  God’s  goods  will 
not  be  content  to  hear  God  only  in  moments 
of  meditation.  His  God  cannot  be  “cribbed, 
cabined,  and  confined”  to  thought;  he  invades 
all  of  life.  You  cannot  sever  his  from  him. 
The  steward  seeks  to  show  God  forth  in  the 
face  of  property.  Or,  to  put  it  in  other  words, 
he  has  the  conviction  that  property  ought  to 
do  what  God  wants  done.  He  has  an  undy¬ 
ing  resolve  that  it  shall  do  nothing  else!  Prop¬ 
erty  is  God’s;  stewardship  is  the  means  of 
exalting  him  through  it.  Wealth  must  worship , 
or  at  least,  must  aid  in  it. 

There  is  a  further  way  of  stating  what 
property  is  given  of  God  to  do:  Wealth  is  a 
social  product  and  must  serve  society.  Property 
has  a  social  cause.  Society  has  produced  it. 
It  required  long  generations  and  unnumbered 
hosts  of  people  to  make  possible  the  things 
which  we  value.  The  material  things  now 
available  for  satisfying  our  wants  root  largely 
in  the  past.  We  reap  what  was  sown  long  ago. 

At  infinite  cost  and  labor  our  values  were  pro- 

96 


STEWARDSHIP  AND  PROPERTY 


duced.  Referring  to  the  past  does  not  mean 
reverting  to  it.  It  does  mean  acknowledgment 
of  the  foundations  laid  and  the  structures 
reared  by  those  who  went  before.  Let  no 
one  suppose  that  property  is  something  the 
present  produced.  It  is  the  result  of  the 
search  and  study,  the  struggle  and  suffering 
of  multitudes  now  gone.  They  made  a  great 
investment.  We  should  at  least  prove  to  be 
a  fair  interest  on  this  investment.  Not  only 
has  property  a  social  cause,  but  it  has  a  social 
life.  Property  would  be  worthless  the  moment 
society  ceased.  It  is  only  by  virtue  of  society 
that  property  is  worth  having.  In  this  day 
of  complex  activities,  it  should  be  apparent 
to  all  how  property  is  dependent  on  cooperative 
life.  We  usually  produce  but  a  tiny  part  of 
a  product;  the  rest  of  the  world  joins  labors 
to  complete  and  to  market  it.  Manufacture 
and  commerce,  to  mention  but  a  few,  show 
how  impossible  it  is  for  property  to  live  a 
hermit  life.  Property  not  only  is,  but  has  a 
social  effect.  Of  all  things  that  need  to  be 
remembered  about  it  this  easily  stands  first. 
It  is  for  freedom  of  control  over  things  that 
men  strive  by  day  and  by  night.  In  the  mean¬ 
ing  of  property  for  society  to-day  lies  chiefly 

97 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


the  disorder  of  our  social  order.  Now,  for  the 
trustee  of  God’s  goods  this  all  has  significance. 
His  stewardship  for  God  means  stewardship  for 
society.  To  him,  property  will  speak  elo¬ 
quently  of  the  solidarity  of  sin.  There  is  not 
only  a  biological  transmission  of  sin,  but  a 
social  transmission  of  it.  The  past  has  its 
share  of  guilt  in  making  property  anti-social. 
The  present  has  deep  responsibility  for  justi¬ 
fying,  idealizing,  and  perpetuating  greed  and 
for  placing  economic  profit  above  the  pursuit 
of  God.  “An  enlightened  conscience  cannot 
help  feeling  a  growing  sense  of  responsibility 
and  guilt  for  the  common  sins  under  which 
humanity  is  bound  and  to  which  they  all 
contribute.  .  .  .  Whose  hand  has  never  been 
stained  with  income  for  which  no  equivalent 
has  been  given  in  service?  How  many  business 
men  have  promoted  the  advance  of  democracy 
in  their  own  industrial  kingdom  when  autocracy 
seemed  safer  and  more  efficient?  What  nation 
has  never  been  drunk  with  a  sense  of  its  glory 
and  importance,  and  which  has  never  seized 
colonial  possessions  or  developed  its  little 
imperialism  when  the  temptation  came  its 
way?  The  sin  of  all  is  in  each  of  us,  and  every 

one  of  us  has  scattered  seeds  of  evil,  the  final 

98 


STEWARDSHIP  AND  PROPERTY 


multiplied  harvest  of  which  no  man  knows.”2 
The  Christian  steward  will  bring  forth  fruits 
worthy  of  repentance  with  his  property.  He 
will  not  let  his  possession  sin  against  the  social 
good.  To  him  property  will  afford  the  means 
for  social  saviourhood.  To  the  extent  that  he 
directly  controls  it  he  will  use  it  to  benefit 
mankind.  He  will  not  be  content  with  tithing 
even  though  he  may  cheerfully  tithe.  But 
stewardship  will  be  a  policy,  not  toward  a 
part  of  one’s  income,  but  toward  all  one  owns 
or  exercises  influence  upon.  The  other  day 
the  representative  of  the  tobacco  trust  set 
sail  for  China.  He  is  reported  to  have  said 
he  was  going  in  the  hope  that  throughout 
China  three  lights  might  be  seen  every¬ 
where:  the  light  of  the  gospel,  the  light  of 
oil,  the  light  of  the  cigarette.  Had  the  re¬ 
porter  who  interviewed  him  remembered  his 
Sunday-school  studies,  he  might  have  quoted 
him  Scripture:  “If  the  light  that  is  in 
thee  be  darkness,  how  great  is  that  dark¬ 
ness!”  For  the  steward,  business  has  no 
business  to  group  the  gospel  with  greed. 
His  goods  must  serve  good.  Wealth  must 

2  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  A  Theology 
for  the  Social  Gospel,  by  Walter  Rauschenbusch. 

99 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 

be  used  to  bring  mankind  to  Christian  man¬ 
hood. 

He  has  another  duty  with  the  resources 
furnished  by  God.  Property  is  an  individual 
product  and  must  develop  personality.  “Modern 
social  science  shows  beyond  question  that  all 
the  wealth  of  the  world  really  resides  in  men; 
that  there  are  no  values  of  any  sort  apart 
from  men;  and  that  all  the  values  which  we 
know  are  their  creation.  Human  beings,  in 
other  words,  are  not  only  the  sole  source  of 
value,  but  they  are  the  supreme  values.  The 
development  of  the  resources  which  are  in 
men,  therefore,  is  the  only  way  in  which  the 
world  can  be  permanently  enriched  along  any 
line.”3  Men  often  say,  “Money  is  myself/’ 
What  they  mean  in  saying  this  is  that  the  best 
of  their  time  and  strength,  and  frequently  of 
their  thought,  goes  into  the  making  of  it. 
And  of  this  there  can  be  no  doubt.  But  to 
speak  of  money  as  “myself”  is  a  poor  putting 
of  the  matter.  For  a  man  is  more  than  his 
means,  unless  he  has  sold  out  to  them! 

“One  thing  is  yours  you  may  not  spend: 

Your  very  inmost  self  of  all — 

1  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  The  Re¬ 
construction  of  Religion,  p.  162,  by  Charles  A.  Ellwood. 

100 


STEWARDSHIP  AND  PROPERTY 


You  may  not  bind  it,  may  not  bend. 

Nor  stem  the  river  of  your  call. 

To  make  for  ocean  is  its  end.”4 

There  are  those  who  think  that  property 
masters  personality.  To  them  “every  man  has 
his  price/’  and  every  woman,  virtue  and  all, 
is  at  the  mercy  of  cash.  High-priests  of  mam¬ 
mon  auction  off  bodies  and  souls  at  the  call 
of  profit.  There  is  a  sublime  passage  in  Uncle 
Tom's  Cabin  that  should  be  read  them  in 
church.  His  owner  lashes  Tom  with  the  whip — 
and  taunts:  “Ain’t  I  yer  master?  Ain’t  yer 
mine  now,  body  and  soul?  Didn’t  I  pay  down 
twelve  hundred  dollars  for  all  that  is  in  yer 
old  black  shell?”  But  the  soul  of  Tom  was 
equal  to  the  occasion.  He  could  not  be  kept 
down:  “No!  No!”  answered  he.  “No!  No! 
My  soul  ain’t  yours.  It’s  been  bought  and 
paid  for  by  One  that’s  able  to  keep  it.  No 
matter!  No  matter!  You  can’t  harm  me /” 
There  is  a  superb  consciousness  of  the  suprem¬ 
acy  of  the  spiritual  begotten  within  its  followers 
by  Christianity  which  is  ominous  for  the 
keepers  of  the  house  of  greed.  The  trustee  of 
God’s  goods  is  a  partner  with  the  Lord  in 
protecting  personality.  To  the  extent  of  his 


4  Ibsen. 


101 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


ability,  he  will  employ  neither  his  talents  nor 
those  of  other  men  in  making  goods  which  no 
one  can  make  with  happiness  or  without  loss 
of  self-respect.  He  will  not,  if  he  can  help  it, 
waste  his  life  or  the  lives  of  others  in  func¬ 
tionless  acquisitions.  It  is  true,  there  are 
staggering  problems  which  no  one  has  thus 
far  solved.  One  perceives  them  when  he  lets 
industry  testify  a  bit.  Man  needed  clothing 
and  solved  the  problem  by  making  spinning 
wheels.  The  wheel  with  its  revolutions  revolu¬ 
tionized  all  industry.  But  the  existence  of  the 
wheels  made  for  the  persistence  of  their  use. 
Their  creation  compelled  their  operation.  Mar¬ 
kets  were  sought  that  profit  might  be  had 
and  employment  assured.  It  ceased  to  be 
a  question  of  providing  shelter  from  the  cold. 
It  has  come  to  be  a  question  of  dividends  and 
work.  The  organized  totality  of  mechanical 
contrivances  compels  humanity  to  keep  them 
going,  or  else  run  the  risk  of  perishing.  “The 
economic  made  to  serve  the  vital  now  makes 
the  vital  serve  the  economic.”  The  creation 
of  tools  solved  one  problem,  but  in  that  solu¬ 
tion  man  created  an  infinitely  bigger  one.5 

6  For  this  line  of  thought  the  author  is  indebted  to  an  article  written 
some  years  ago  in  The  Hibbert  Journal  by  Dr.  L.  P.  Jacks. 

102 


STEWARDSHIP  AND  PROPERTY 


Just  how  to  protect  personality  from  being  less 
than  “a  living  creature  among  the  wheels”  is 
a  mooted  question,  with  which  we  should  all 
be  concerned.  The  Christian  steward  would 
be  the  last  to  refuse  to  give  it  thought.  As 
far  as  possible  he  will  utilize  property  to  pro¬ 
tect  personality.  Furthermore,  he  will  utilize 
property  to  project  personality.  It  will  be  his 
concern  to  make  property  creative.  With 
Browning,  he  “counts  life  just  the  stuff  to  try 
the  soul’s  strength  on.”  Property  must  de¬ 
velop,  not  envelop,  personality.  It  must  build 
life;  it  must  not  break  it  down.  Francis  Thomp¬ 
son  once  shrewdly  remarked  that  “no  heathen 
ever  saw  the  same  tree  as  Wordsworth.”  Seen 
through  the  eyes  of  the  steward,  property  must 
augment  and  promote  personality.  That  a 
pagan  does  not  see  life  this  way  matters  not 
to  him.  The  eye  of  the  steward  is  single.  It 
is  focused  on  the  soul.  He  must  come  to 
expression  through  his  property.  He  will  let 
his  money  preach  in  far  off  lands.  He  will 
let  his  gifts  bring  freedom  to  bodies  and  minds; 
and  to  “spirits  in  prison,”  jailed  personalities, 
his  wealth  will  minister.  He  will  use  his  money 
to  improve  his  mind,  enlarge  his  heart, 

strengthen  his  good  will.  He  will  have  “queer” 

103 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


business  methods,  lest  his  soul  succumb  to 
selfishness.  A  Christian  steward  will  make 
his  property  godlike,  and  his  property,  in 
turn,  will  make  him  like  his  God. 

To  many  this  line  of  reasoning  sounds  like 
far-fetched  idealism.  But  to  the  Christian 
steward  all  this  is  merely  sense.  “There  is 
no  morning’ 5  for  those  who  dismiss  as  visionary 
the  vision  which  he  has: 

4 ‘This,  this  it  is  to  be  accursed  indeed; 

For  if  we  mortals  love,  or  if  we  sing, 

We  count  our  joys  not  by  the  things  we  have, 
But  by  what  kept  us  from  the  perfect  thing.”6 

It  may  be  worth  our  while  to  recapitulate. 
Stewardship  is  our  use  of  property  for  God’s 
ends.  Property  and  possessions  may  be  diffi¬ 
cult  to  define,  but  we  clearly  mean  with  them 
the  things  we  are  free  to  control.  Stewardship 
views  this  control  in  the  light  of  three  great 
facts:  1.  Property  is  God’s  and  so  it  must 
honor  him.  2.  Property  is  social  and  intended 
for  the  advance  of  society.  3.  Property  is  per¬ 
sonal  and  must  help  personality  to  come  into 
its  own.  It  is  these  commonplace  facts  Chris¬ 
tian  stewards  never  forget.  And  to  this 
heavenly  vision  they  are  not  disobedient! 

6  Collected  Poems  of  Paul  Laurence  Dunbar.  Copyrighted  by  Dodd, 
Mead  &  Company,  Publishers,  New  York  City. 

104 


“You  know  the  rulers  of  the  Gentiles  lord  it  over 
them,  and  their  great  men  overbear  them: 
not  so  with  you. 

“Whoever  wants  to  be  great  among  you  must 
be  your  servant,  and  whoever  wants  to  be  first 
among  you  must  be  your  slave;  just  as  the  Son  of 
man  has  not  come  to  be  served  but  to  serve  and  to 
give  his  life  as  a  ransom  for  many.” — Jesus. 

Oh,  brother  men,  if  you  have  eyes  at  all, 
Look  at  a  branch,  a  bird,  a  child,  a  rose, 

Or  anything  God  ever  made  that  grows — 
Nor  let  the  smallest  vision  of  it  slip, 

Till  you  may  read,  as  on  Belshazzar’s  wall, 
The  glory  of  eternal  partnership.” 

— Edwin  Arlington  Robinson.1 


1  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  Sonnet, 
Collected  Poems,  p.  96,  by  Edwin  Arlington  Robinson. 


106 


CHAPTER  YI 
CREATIVE  OWNERSHIP 

Property  is  a  necessity.  If  we  merely  had  to 
exist,  the  case  might  be  different.  If  we  only 
needed  some  arrangement  to  meet  our  tempo¬ 
rary  wants,  property  problems  would  scarcely 
harass  us.  But  it  is  more  than  a  question  of 
existence.  It  is  a  question  of  life.  To  live 
we  must  have  freedom  to  realize  ourselves. 
Some  degree  of  liberty  must  be  ours  for  indi¬ 
vidual  action.  We  must  be  able  to  make 
plans;  to  arrange  life  in  accordance  with 
them;  to  choose;  to  have  reasonable  expecta¬ 
tion  as  to  the  result  of  the  choice.  For  all  of 
which  we  must  have  control  over  some  things. 
These  things  we  must  be  absolutely  able  to 
count  on;  no  one  must  have  the  power  to  take 
them  from  us.  If  we  could  only  keep  what 
we  are  strong  enough  to  defend,  there  would 
be  neither  liberty  nor  guarantee  of  life.  Prop¬ 
erty  is  a  means  toward  a  full  life.  Stewardship 
recognizes  that  property  is  a  necessity  for 

every  one.  Necessary,  that  is,  as  a  means,  not 

107 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


an  end  of  life.  And  it  recognizes  the  disparity 
between  the  need  and  the  social  order  which 
exists  to  supply  the  need.  Under  feudalism 
the  child  was  born  into  a  system  in  which  there 
was  some  assured  basis  for  a  livelihood.  But 
to-day  “five  out  of  every  six  children  are  born 
tQ  no  assured  place  in  our  industrial  system.”1 
Of  their  own,  they  have  no  means  of  sub¬ 
sistence.  The  “blessing”  of  poverty  is  often 
recited.  But  those  of  us  who  have  experienced 
it  know  that  this  blessing  all  too  easily  becomes 
a  curse.  That  the  struggle  for  existence  has 
its  compensations  no  one  can  doubt;  but  when 
the  struggle  is  hopeless,  when  it  never  finds 
fruition  in  fullness  of  life,  the  soul  is  crushed 
by  the  very  thing  that  was  meant  to  set  it  on 
high.  No  person  of  sense  will  plead  for  effort¬ 
less  careers.  But  when  most  folks  are  com¬ 
pelled  to  put  most  of  their  energy  into  obtain¬ 
ing  a  tool,  property,  rather  than  a  goal,  per¬ 
sonality,  grave  injustice  is  done  to  life.  This 
enforced,  perpetual  plodding  at  the  scaffolding 
of  life  stewardship  deplores.  It  has  a  fellow 
feeling  with  Jesus  for  those  who  are  thus  bound 
with  “heavy  burdens,  grievous  to  be  borne.” 

1  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  Property, 
Its  Duties  and  Rights,  p.  22,  Essays  by  Various  Authors. 

108 


CREATIVE  OWNERSHIP 


It  shares  his  belief  that  the  reign  of  God  ought 
to  be  the  primary  interest  of  life.  It  abhors 
any  system  that  gives  an  exaggerated  prom¬ 
inence  to  property.  Jesus  suggested  that 
such  a  state  of  affairs  may  do  well  enough 
for  pagans;  but  in  the  Christian  order  of  things 
it  will  never  do.  Property  is  a  tool  rather 
than  a  task;  and  stewardship  is  concerned  that 
every  child  of  God  shall  have  this  implement. 

To  put  this  differently,  we  have  the  right  to 
property.  On  this  all  men  agree.  Roth  the 
greedy  and  the  idealists  are  at  one  concerning 
this.  Even  Communism  does  not  attempt  to 
abolish  property.  It  merely  attempts  to  reduce 
to  a  minimum  the  private  use  of  it.  The  aim 
of  Socialism  is  not  the  extinction  of  private 
property,  but  the  extinction  of  private  capital 
— quite  a  different  thing,  to  which  we  shall 
later  allude.  This  acknowledgment  all  along 
the  line  of  man’s  right  to  property  is  based, 
of  course,  on  the  recognition  of  its  necessity. 
This  right  is  not  limitless.  No  person  has  the 
right  to  own  what  ought  to  go  to  others.  But 
every  person  has  the  right  to  enough  to  assure 
fullness  of  life.  When  the  steward  knows, 
as  he  ought  to,  that  a  majority  of  the  people 

in  the  world  still  go  hungry  for  physical  needs, 

109 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


let  alone  the  higher  needs,  while  they  hunger 
and  thirst  far  too  little  for  righteousness,  he 
knows  that  somewhere  there  is  meddling  with 
the  prerogatives  of  life.  In  the  light  of  budget 
estimates  and  government  statistics,  eighty  per 
cent  of  the  incomes  in  our  country  are  seen 
to  be  inadequate  to  keep  those  dependent 
upon  them  in  the  ordinary  comforts  of  life. 
This  ought  to  convince  the  most  skeptical  that 
property  is  not  used  in  the  way  God  intends 
it  to  be.  The  steward  has  this  conviction  by 
way  of  the  spirit  of  Christ.  In  the  name  of 
the  realm  of  God  he  enters  his  protest. 

But  he  does  not  rest  with  this.  There  are 
at  least  two  assertions  which  he  is  bound  to 
make.  The  first  of  these  is  that  there  are  no 
'property  rights.  This  needs  to  be  said  out 
loud  and  frequently  these  days.  As  with  life, 
so  with  a  word;  it  is  possible  to  denude  a  con¬ 
tent  of  all  simile  to  intent.  But  even  for 
shadowy  meanings  there  is  no  excuse.  These 
“rights”  are  so  derivative,  so  relative,  so  con¬ 
ditional  that  to  call  them  “rights”  serves  only 
to  sustain  a  popular  fallacy.  No  existent 
superstition  slanders  sanity  more.  Steward¬ 
ship  has  a  beneficent  influence  on  one’s  vocab¬ 
ulary.  One’s  words  get  the  single  eye;  they 

110 


CREATIVE  OWNERSHIP 


wear  no  masks;  they  are  shorn  of  double 
meanings;  they  do  not  “double  cross.”  For 
the  steward  there  are  no  rights  that  do  not 
root  in  right;  and  there  is  no  right  apart  from 
God  and  humanity  and  us.  Things  are  non- 
moral;  things  can  have  no  rights,  only  persons 
can.  This  discrimination  is  inherent  in  steward¬ 
ship.  It  offends  the  acquisitive;  they  look  for 
another  church!  But  it  must  be  made,  with¬ 
out  fear  or  favor.  “That  detachment  of  a 
man’s  heart  from  all  material  wealth  which 
Christ  so  solemnly  inculcates  and  that  love 
for  one’s  neighbor  as  oneself  which  he  makes 
central  in  true  religion,  alike  rebuke  all  self- 
assertive  claims  for  the  rights  of  property.”2 
Property,  like  the  Sabbath,  was  made  for 
man;  not  man  for  property. 

But  there  is  more  to  do  than  to  deny  property 
rights.  Stewards  make  such  negative  state¬ 
ments  only  as  correctives  of  thought.  They 
make  a  positive  assertion  that  gets  to  the 
bottom  of  things:  Duties  must  precede  rights. 
Men  who  extol  property  rights  often  mean 
ownership  rights.  It  is  because  of  this  that 
they  relish  their  talk  of  rights;  although  their 

2  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  Property , 
Its  Duties  and  Rights,  pp.  98,  99,  Essays  by  Various  Authors. 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


speech  sometimes  suggests  whistling  to  keep 
courage  up.  Blast  property  rights  if  you  must; 
but  how  are  you  going  to  answer  our  claim 
to  ownership?  It  is  at  this  point  that  steward¬ 
ship  sees  clear  and  steadily.  We  but  have  the 
right  to  own  in  order  to  do  our  duty!  4 4 We 
need  a  new  Revolution,”  says  Professor  Edwin 
Grant  Conklin.3  44The  disharmonies  of  society 
and  the  conflicts  of  interests  and  minds  and 
purposes,  have  come  largely  from  the  exalting 
of  individual  rights  over  social  obligations.  We 
need  a  new  Revolution  which  will  enforce  the 
duties  of  man,  as  our  former  Revolution  em¬ 
phasized  the  rights  of  man.  How  easily  the  dis¬ 
harmonies  of  society  could  be  silenced,  and  the 
conflicts  between  individuals  and  classes  and 
nations  could  be  settled,  if  men  were  taught  to 
think  more  of  their  duties  and  less  of  their 
rights!” 

There  can  he  no  ownership  apart  from  obliga¬ 
tion.  Indeed,  it  is  rather  pretentious  in  us  to 
refer  to  ourselves  as  owners.  The  writer  was 
once  accosted  by  a  large  employer  whose  wrath 
could  not  be  stayed!  Some  young  lady,  fresh 
from  college,  had  deigned  to  visit  him.  Guess 

3  The  Direction  of  Human  Evolution ,  p.  122.  Charles  Scribner’s  Sons, 
publishers,  New  York  City. 


112 


CREATIVE  OWNERSHIP 


what  she  did!  She  began  to  assail  the  citadel 
of  his  proprietorship  with  the  sixteen-inch 
guns  of  sociology.  “Would  you  believe  it?”  he 
flashed  at  me,  as  fury  flashed  in  his  eyes. 
“That  girl  kept  up  an  incessant  chatter  about 
the  unearned  increment.”  Before  this  the 
unearned  increment  had  meant  nothing  in  his 
life.  He  might  not  have  recognized  it  if  it  had 
been  written  all  over  the  property  where  all  the 
time  it  was!  If  social  science  can  reveal  that 
what  we  own  owes  its  value  to  society  rather 
than  to  the  work  of  our  hands,  how  much  more 
can  the  religion  of  Christ  make  this  clear  to 
us!  “Ye  are  not  your  own,  for  ye  were  bought 
with  a  price.”  There  is  the  investment  of 
God  to  consider;  it  is  his  purpose  we  are  debtor 
to.  Stewardship  comes  to  adjust  our  scale 
of  values.  With  Christians,  God  heads  the 
list,  and  life  comes  a  close  second;  or  we  are 
none  of  his. 

So  it  comes  that  we  have  a  right  to  such 
; property  as  we  have  the  right  to  use.  To  gram¬ 
marians  this  will  sound  like  tautology.  We 
are  afraid  that  it  is,  but  there  seems  no  escap¬ 
ing  it.  The  best  of  thinkers  have  ransacked 
language  to  express  the  thought  in  their  minds. 
Yet  they  have  been  unable  to  compose  a 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


phrase  to  obviate  the  clumsy  putting  to  which 
we  here  resort.  Professor  Hobhouse  talks  of 
“property  for  use”  and  “property  for  power.” 
Men  like  Gore  and  Rauschenbusch  have  util¬ 
ized  this  distinction.  But  it  leaves  much  to 
be  desired.  Talk  of  property  for  use  and  the 
question  arises.  For  whose  use  and  what,  or 
for  how  long  and  much?  For  it  is  both  the 
kind  and  the  degree  of  use  stewardship  asks 
about.  Talk  of  property  for  power  and  at 
once  you  remember  that  property  is  power; 
that  there  is  constant  confusion  of  power  and 
force;  that  much  property  for  power  is  force  by 
which  the  many  are  compelled  to  serve  the  few. 
Property  at  its  best  gives  us  control  over 
things  for  life,  and  not  control  over  life  for 
things ! 

But  just  how  are  we  going  to  draw  the 
line?  Here  is  a  problem  that  baffles  the 
brainiest.  Just  at  what  juncture  self-realiza¬ 
tion  becomes  self-aggrandizement  is  difficult 
to  tell.  The  difficulty  is  aggravated  by  the 
difference  in  needs  in  various  social  conditions. 
To  function  usefully,  a  biologist  needs  more 
property  than  a  baker.  A  philosopher  will 
need  more  books  than  a  bookkeeper;  a  farmer 

more  ground  than  a  fisherman.  One  who 

114 


CREATIVE  OWNERSHIP 


has  lived  in  crowded  quarters  will  have  the 
profound  conviction  that  the  ownership  of 
pianos  should  be  strictly  confined  to  those 
who  were  predestined  to  play!  But  how  is 
one  going  to  tell?  Some  things,  moreover,  are 
more  truly  ours  than  other  things  can  be. 
Ideas,  inventions,  literary  and  musical  pro¬ 
ductions  are  more  nearly  personal.  Just  where 
one’s  self-expression  gets  into  the  way  of 
others  it  is  not  easy  to  know.  But  to  one 
fixed  star  we  may  cling.  Property  must  serve 
personality .  In  other  words,  it  must  be  judged 
in  the  light  of  its  social  effectiveness.  Does 
property  so  preoccupy  a  person  that  he  is 
thereby  prevented  from  fulfilling  the  obliga¬ 
tions  of  parenthood?  Does  it  make  him 
inconsiderate;  does  it  blind  him  to  the  needs 
of  others;  does  it  make  him  forgetful  that 
every  one  else  has  the  right  to  a  full-orbed 
life?  Then  property  is  a  millstone  about  that 
man’s  soul.  Does  it  enable  him  to  do  some 
effective  piece  of  service;  to  be  filial;  to  have 
reverence  for  life?  Then  property  is  a  tool 
of  God  in  worthy  hands.  Experience  and 
exigency  will  likely  always  have  to  determine 
how  much  property  one  can  privately  properly 

use.  But  this  is  a  criterion  which  sheds  a  flood 

115 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


of  light  on  property  to-day.  It  is  clear  that 
much  of  our  property  now  dwarfs  personality. 
And  it  is  our  Christian  duty  to  see  that  it  is 
made  to  serve. 

The  steward  tries  to  approximate  the  actual 
to  the  ideal.  He  does  not  feel  free  to  dispense 
with  the  grace  of  introspection.  He  takes 
this  matter  to  heart.  And  he  has  a  question 
to  ask  of  all  who  have  ears  to  hear.  Or,  better, 
he  has  two  questions  with  which  to  search 
the  soul:  “What  use  have  you  the  right  to  make 
of  property?”  “What  use  do  you  make  of 
it?”  Both  of  these  questions  must  also  be 
faced  in  the  light  of  larger  things.  The  first 
question  has  been  discussed  and  further  treat¬ 
ment  awaits  it.  But  the  second  question  is 
pertinent  at  this  juncture.  It  is  a  fashion  with 
business  people  to  talk  of  capital  and  income. 
Salaried  and  working  people  have  their  direct 
control  limited  to  the  latter.  Suppose,  then, 
we  limit  this  question  to  the  use  one  makes 
of  his  income.  Let  private  stewardship  practice 
engage  our  thought.  There  is  a  subtle  danger 
in  looking  upon  one’s  income  as  something 
strictly  private,  to  do  with  what  we  will. 
Self-indulgences  break  down  personality.  Ex¬ 
travagance  is  the  expenditure  of  money  with- 

116 


CREATIVE  OWNERSHIP 


out  a  sense  of  obligation.  No  one  can  come 
to  his  best  without  volitional  sacrifice.  And 
the  question  of  the  selfish  use  of  one’s  income 
at  once  suggests  the  opposite  use  of  it.  Now, 
once  one  feels  that  property  must  further 
personality,  one  is  bound  to  be  drawn  in 
heart  to  the  program  of  the  church.  For  here 
is  an  institution  that,  despite  its  many  failures, 
has  insistently  asserted  the  immortal  worth 
of  the  soul.  It  does  not  lift  men  from  things 
but  above  things.  It  gives  them  God.  It  is 
here,  and  not  in  tithing,  that  the  argument 
comes  in  for  the  support  of  the  cause  of  Christ. 
The  consciousness  of  God  is  the  topmost  need 
of  life.  The  steward  feels  that  God  comes 
first  in  all  his  property.  It  is  not  a  question 
of  the  firstfruits,  the  first  portion;  it  is  a  ques¬ 
tion  of  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit,  the  first  propor¬ 
tion.  “In  all  things  giving  Him  preeminence.” 
The  world  needs  God;  our  money  can  bring 
him  to  men.  The  world  needs  his  reign;  our 
money  can  build  up  his  democracy.  Is  one 
tenth  of  one’s  earnings  excessive  to  give  to  a 
cause  like  this?  The  outcome  of  our  income 
must  be  the  success  of  Christ’s  cause. 

Let  us  see  how  far  we  have  come.  We  have 

seen  that  social  spirituality  expresses  itself  in 

117 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


stewardship.  The  tithe,  though  it  may  help, 
does  not  suffice  as  a  measure  of  our  steward¬ 
ship.  Trusteeship  must  come  to  expression 
in  all  property.  Property  has  no  rights;  it 
must  be  rightly  used.  To  be  partners  with 
God  in  winning  the  world  to  the  life  of  Christ 
we  must  strive  to  bring  all  things  into  sub¬ 
jection  to  his  will. 


118 


' 


■ 


■ 


- 


. 


“A  rich  man’s  estate  bore  heavy  crops.  So  he 
debated,  ‘What  am  I  to  do?  I  have  no  room  to 
store  my  crops.’  And  he  said,  ‘This  is  what  I 
will  do.  I  will  pull  down  my  granaries  and  build 
larger  ones,  where  I  can  store  all  my  produce  and 
my  goods.  And  I  will  say  to  my  soul,  “Soul,  you 
have  ample  stores  laid  up  for  many  a  year;  take 
your  ease,  eat,  drink  and  be  merry.”  ’  But  God 
said  to  him,  ‘Foolish  man,  this  very  night  your 
soul  is  wanted;  and  who  will  get  all  you  have  pre¬ 
pared?’  So  fares  the  man  who  lays  up  treasure 
for  himself  instead  of  gaining  the  riches  of  God.” 
— Jesus. 

“Industrial  work,  still  under  bondage  to  Mam¬ 
mon,  the  rational  soul  of  it  not  yet  awakened,  is 
a  tragic  spectacle.  .  .  .  Yet  courage:  .  .  .  Labor  is  not 
a  devil,  even  while  encased  in  Mammonism;  Labor 
is  ever  an  imprisoned  god,  writhing  unconsciously 
or  consciously,  to  escape  out  of  Mammonism! .  .  . 
Blessed  and  thrice-blessed  symptoms  I  discern  of 
Master- Workers  who  are  not  vulgar  men;  who 
are  Nobles,  and  begin  to  feel  that  they  must  act 
as  such:  all  speed  to  these.” — Thomas  Carlyle. 


120 


CHAPTER  VII 
ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 

The  acquisitive  habit  is  the  arch  foe  of 
stewardship.  The  person  who  is  afflicted  with 
acute  accumulativeness  has  an  anti-Christian 
estimate  of  property.  In  the  ritual  for  the 
communion  service  God  is  described  as  One 
“whose  property  is  always  to  have  mercy.” 
The  man  who  framed  that  phrase  wrote  better 
than  he  knew.  That  this  is  a  function  of  prop¬ 
erty  many  seem  unable  to  grasp.  The  truth 
needs  be  stretched  not  one  whit  to  assert  that 
man’s  property  is  often  merciless.  Both  the 
brother  who  opined  that  all  men  are  liars  and 
the  man  who  averred  that  property  is  robbery 
generalized  the  truth  out  of  countenance.  Yet 
much  that  by  the  rule  of  man  is  legalized 
property  in  the  light  of  the  reign  of  God  is 
seen  to  be  downright  robbery.  The  Chris¬ 
tian  holds  that  property  must  serve  God  in 
man.  Thus,  when  a  man  seeks  property  with¬ 
out  regard  to  the  will  of  God  his  estimate  goes 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


astray.  He  then  confuses  the  means  with 
the  end.  Acquisition  irrespective  of  service  is 
in  many  circles  still  deemed  respectable.  Men 
who  hold  this  view  are  singularly  blind  to  the 
wrongs  done  with  property  and  peculiarly 
sensitive  to  wrongs  done  to  property.  Property 
becomes  the  golden  calf  to  which  they  expect 
all  and  sundry  to  make  obeisance.  This 
species  of  idolatry  denaturates  the  soul.  One 
loses  the  ability  to  differentiate  between  the 
good  and  evil  uses  of  property.  One  thinks 
of  property  as  something  static,  “without 
variableness  or  shadow  cast  by  turning,”  at 
the  mention  of  which  it  is  immediately  incum¬ 
bent  on  us  all  to  show  respect.  Because  of  the 
obstinacy  of  this  estimate  men  to  whose  finan¬ 
cial  interest  it  is  that  peace  prevail  in  the 
industrial  world  unintentionally  keep  it  in 
turmoil.  This  inability  to  discriminate  in  the 
realm  of  property  was  recently  illustrated  when 
a  representative  of  the  coal  mine  owners  testi¬ 
fied  before  the  Senate  Committee  on  Education 
and  Labor.  Speaking  about  the  United  Mine 
Workers,  whose  belief  in  the  nationalization  of 
mines  he  confessed  having  in  mind,  he  said: 
“Mr.  Chairman,  we  just  as  much  decline  to 

talk  with  them  ...  as  we  would  decline  to 

122 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 


sit  down  and  talk  with  a  robber  or  any  other 
man  who  told  us  that  when  he  got  the  power 
he  intended  to  take  our  property  away  from  us. 
There  is  no  use  of  discussing  with  a  man  whose 
aim  and  object  is  to  take  away  your  property, 
when  he  can.”  And  further:  “I  believe  we 
would  be  justified”  (in  discharging  a  man 
who  announces  his  faith  in  the  union)  “because 
we  know  that  he  would  be  like  a  man  coming 
into  your  house — if  that  man  told  you,  to 
begin  with,  that  before  he  got  out  he  intended 
to  rob  your  house,  I  do  not  care  how  pleasant 
he  was  when  he  came  in.  .  .  .  And  we  keep  out 
organizers  of  the  United  Mine  Workers  for 
exactly  the  same  reason  that  those  whose 
pictures  are  in  the  rogues’  gallery  are  kept  out 
of  lower  New  York.”  Note  the  delinquency  of 
this  viewpoint!  He  compared  men  who  wished 
to  nationalize  mines  (at  equitable  reimburse¬ 
ment)  to  men  who  steal  the  treasures  of  one’s 
home!  As  if  property  for  profit  and  property 
for  personality  were  always  one  and  the  same 
thing!  It  does  seem  as  if  no  person  should 
be  allowed  to  be  an  employer  of  labor  or  have 
extensive  control  over  the  tools  of  production 
who  has  not  passed  a  satisfactory  examination 

both  as  to  character  and  intelligence.  It  is 

123 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


even  more  tragic  when  labor  leaders  have 
this  defective  view.  The  lack  of  discrimina¬ 
tion  is,  alas!  all  too  prevalent  among  them. 
Their  shortsightedness  infects  the  multitudes 
for  whom  they  should  be  eyes.  There  are  few 
ways  in  which  a  steward  can  better  serve  his 
day  than  in  spreading  the  Christian  estimate 
of  property  and  in  helping  to  keep  clear  the 
distinction  between  property  used  for  profit 
and  property  for  service. 

The  acquisitive  habit  also  begets  a  wrong 
estimate  of  rights .  In  Christianity,  love  is 
right.  Growth  in  God,  filial  conduct,  satis¬ 
faction  in  service — these  are  the  Christian 
prerogatives.  These  are  the  essential  rights 
every  person  has.  But  when  greed  moves  in 
God  moves  out.  Then  comes  the  conflict  of 
rights!  The  creed  of  selfishness  asserts  that 
the  right  to  accumulate  is  quite  limitless.  It  is 
unfortunate  that  this  has  come  to  be  known 
as  the  capitalistic  view,  for  this  has  the  impli¬ 
cation  that  it  is  confined  to  capitalists.  Many 
a  poor  person  has  greed  for  his  creed.  And 
many  a  self-righteous  member  of  our  fortunate 
middle-class  owns  to  this  outlook  on  life. 
When  labor-leaders  leave  good-sized  fortunes 

the  suspicion  will  not  down  that  they  were  of 

124 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 

kindred  mind.  Many  in  all  walks  of  life  make 
this  the  basis  for  daily  conduct.  It  is  often 
camouflaged  by  toning  down  the  words  in 
which  the  assertion  is  made.  You  frequently 
hear  men  talk  of  “the  right  to  the  product  of 
one’s  labor.”  But  no  one  has  this  right!  It 
is  the  philosophy  of  grab  and  get.  A  man 
must  contribute  toward  life  as  well  as  get 
something  out  of  it.  But  suppose  a  man  had 
the  right  to  all  that  he  produced.  It  would 
then  become  a  question  of  how  much  is  really 
his.  For  materials  and  machinery  are  traceable 
to  God  and  the  work  of  other  men;  in  this 
complex  day  production  is  not  so  simple  as 
he  assumes.  It  has  been  suggested  that  for 
mental  exercise,  which  would  not  be  without 
its  spiritual  benefits,  a  man  should  attempt 
to  apportion  aright  the  labor  in  the  suit  he 
wears.  How  much  credit  should  go  to  the 
shepherd  who  tended  the  sheep,  to  the  worker 
in  wool,  to  the  transportation  agents  who 
brought  it  to  the  mill,  to  the  person  who  wove 
the  cloth,  to  the  bookkeeper  or  manager  of 
the  mill  where  it  was  woven,  to  the  merchant 
who  brought  it  to  market,  to  the  tailor  who 
fashioned  it — and  this  does  not  exhaust  the 

list;  or  he  might  figure  out  to  how  much  states- 

125 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


man,  soldier,  school-teacher,  policeman,  are 
severally  entitled  for  the  indirect  services 
rendered  to  make  his  suit  possible!  Less  fre¬ 
quently,  in  our  day,  the  acquisitive  habit  is 
defended  as  “the  right  to  competition.”  But 
this  manifestly  depends  upon  what  we  are 
competing  for;  whom  we  are  competing  with; 
and  whether  all  competitors  have  an  even 
chance  to  compete.  If  we  strive  to  excel  in 
service,  we  accord  with  the  will  of  Christ; 
but  if  we  strive  to  gain  by  advantage  over  the 
weak,  we  have  no  part  in  him.  If  some  men  are 
“damned  into  the  world,”  as  Maeterlinck  por¬ 
trayed,  while  other  men  find  their  lines  cast 
in  pleasant  places,  either  by  virtue  of  heredity 
or  environment,  or  because  some  “windfall” 
lands  just  where  they  are,  the  situation  cannot 
appeal  to  our  sense  of  fairness.  This  right  to 
all  one  can  get  founders  on  other  rocks.  Prop¬ 
erty  is  of  social  character.  Money  would  be 
worthless  but  for  society — and  stable  govern¬ 
ment.  Wealth  is  a  cooperative  achievement. 
Theft  becomes  honor  the  moment  we  concede 
that  a  person  has  the  right  to  appropriate 
whatever  he  can  lay  his  hands  on.  Steward¬ 
ship  comes  to  smite  the  acquisitive  claims 

hip  and  thigh.  To  it  these  rights  are  wrongs! 

126 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 

Men  are  not  holders  of  rights,  they  are  trustees 
for  God. 

The  acquisitive  habit  begets  a  wrong  esti¬ 
mate  of  life.  A  man’s  standards  become  those 
of  profit  instead  of  purpose.  He  thinks  that 
the  degree  of  one’s  efforts  depends  upon  the 
motive  of  gain.  For  him  profit  is  the  spur  to 
work.  How  far  afield  is  this  from  Jesus! 
Christ  pictured  the  satisfaction  of  service  as 
being  paramount.  But  the  adherents  of  acquisi¬ 
tion  do  not  see  with  his  eyes.  They  come  to 
look  upon  business  as  the  most  important 
thing  in  life.  Business  alone  is  business — other 
things  can  await  more  convenient  seasons. 
That  the  realm  of  God  should  be  sought  first, 
is  a  doctrine  reserved  for  preachers  and  other 
unpractical  folks.  Thus  they  make  the  tool 
of  life  the  task  of  life,  than  which  there  could 
be  no  more  pathetic  perversion.  They  exalt 
profit  above  function.  Admiration  of  the 
acquisitive  has  made  its  way  into  our  literature 
and  law.  Not  infrequently  it  pervades  the 
most  precious  of  our  relations;  so  that  mar¬ 
riage  becomes  marketable  and  families  are 
rent  by  disputes  over  bequests.  But  sadder 
than  the  perversion  of  the  ends  of  life  is  the 

perversion  of  soul.  Selfishness  is  spiritual 

127 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


suicide.  These  men  fall  victim  to  the  ego- 
complex.  Individualism  brings  them  low. 
Making  of  one’s  life  all  one  can  regardless  of 
others  makes  one  anti-social.  It  is  only  in 
relationship  to  others  that  life  can  be  fulfilled. 
They  are  found  fighting  against  themselves  when 
they  forget  their  brothers.  They  give  their  lives 
for  what  life  can  give.  What  shall  it  profit  a 
man  if  he  gain  the  whole  world  and  lose  his  life?” 

“Ill  fares  the  land,  to  hastening  ills  a  prey, 

Where  wealth  accumulates  and  men  decay.” 

This  wrong  estimate  results  in  wrong  owner¬ 
ship.  For  now  ownership,  through  control 
over  things  becomes  control  over  life.  If  one 
owns  the  means  of  production,  he  has  control 
over  the  lives  of  those  who  depend  on  his  prop¬ 
erty  for  their  livelihood.  We  have  been  born 
into  an  organized  system  of  property  where 
we  find  the  many  subjected  to  the  few.  Sup¬ 
pose  it  is  too  ideal  to  ask  that  property  shall 
have  mercy  and  shall  thus  approximate  the 
character  of  God.  But  ought  it  not  to  do 
justice;  to  give  freedom  and  security  to  life 
rather  than  to  make  for  its  enslavement?  This 
is  where  ownership  has  gone  dreadfully  wrong. 

Multitudes  have  no  adequate  measure  of 

128 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 

property  for  use.  They  have  not  the  security 
which  freedom  requires.  The  control  of  their 
livelihood  is  in  the  hands  of  others.  As  for 
themselves  they  are  merely  “hands”  for  others. 
These  others  have  the  whip  hand.  The  cards 
up  their  sleeves  are  hunger  and  fear.  Control 
over  labor  will  likely  always  be  necessary.  We 
cannot  dispense  with  the  expert,  nor  with 
authority.  No  man  should  advocate  anarchy 
for  the  sake  of  freedom.  But  control  over 
life ,  which  denies  men  the  right  to  work,  to 
say  nothing  of  creative  work,  is  a  blasphemy 
on  brotherliness.  This  control  over  life  is 
not  always  thus  direct.  It  is  attempted  in 
realms  outside  of  the  sphere  of  production. 
In  an  attempt  to  protect  the  system  on  which 
profits  depend,  men  seek  to  dominate  pulpit, 
press,  bench,  and  schoolroom.  With  the  bulk 
of  the  wealth  in  the  hands  of  a  few  there  is 
always  danger  that  these  social  agencies  shall 
account  themselves  dependent  on  them.  Here 
is  an  item  to  which  the  forward-looking  person 
may  well  give  heed.  The  payment  of  the 
tithe  on  the  part  of  most  church  members 
could  free  these  agencies  from  the  possibility 
of  having  their  freedom  of  thought  and  speech 

curbed  to  protect  a  system  against  which  in 

129 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


the  name  of  Christ  they  should  of  right  pro¬ 
test.  This  control  over  life  leads  to  the  assump¬ 
tion  that  those  who  own  are  the  natural  rulers 
of  those  who  do  not.  Always  there  has  been  an 
economic  basis  for  politics .  One  who  discerns 
the  signs  of  the  times  may  be  sure  that  men 
will  not  much  longer  permit  their  livelihood 
to  be  dependent  upon  the  caprice  of  some 
individual.  Property  has  no  claim  which  is 
valid  against  the  natural  and  fundamental 
right  of  every  man  to  enjoy  the  bounty  of  the 
Creator.  When  property  thus  is  able  to  con¬ 
trol  the  lives  of  men  it  becomes  theft.  For 

“  .  .  .  you  take  away  my  life. 

When  you  do  take  the  means  whereby  I  live,” 

and  this  is  true,  even  though  it  was  Shylock 
who  said  it.  For  some  men,  this  desire  for 
control  over  life  has  more  fascination  than  the 
control  over  resources.  They  can  think  of  no 
greater  thrill  than  to  be  able  to  say,  like  the 
army -captain  who  came  to  Jesus:  “Go,  and 
he  goes; .  .  .  come,  and  he  comes;  ...  do  this, 
and  he  does  it.”  The  dictatorship,  and  not  the 
docility,  carries  the  charm.  It  appeals  to  the 
monarch-mind. 

Stewards  must  note  the  prevalence  of  absentee 

130 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 

ownership.  Here  the  shades  of  deism  haunt 
us!  If  one  has  enough  capital,  he  does  not 
need  to  conduct  his  business.  He  can  “hire 
brains,”  and  frequently  does.  This  has  cer¬ 
tain  results  the  steward  must  cope  with.  For 
here  owners  shift  from  the  productive  to  the 
financial  interest  in  life.  Thus  we  get  passive 
property:  for  which  a  man  does  not  work,  but 
which  works  for  him.  From  it  people  get 
income  without  rendering  service.  True,  there 
are  owners  whose  absence  is  enforced :  dependent 
people  whose  lot  is  cast  in  other  places  and 
who  have  neither  the  ability  nor  opportunity 
to  properly  participate  in  the  conduct  of  the 
business  which  they*  partly  own.  This  wide 
and  apparently  inevitable  distribution  of  stock 
among  widows  and  dependents,  employees  and 
people  of  average  means,  makes  the  problem 
the  more  acute.  For  these  all  invest  to  get. 
They  levy  tax  on  the  labors  of  others.  Back 
in  1848  Mill  said:  “In  no  sound  theory  of 
private  property  was  it  ever  contemplated 
that  the  proprietor  of  land  should  be  merely 
a  sinecurist  quartered  on  it.”  But  here  are 
property  pensioners  who  at  a  distance  reap  the 
benefits  of  an  industry  for  which  they  bear 

little  or  no  responsibility.  And  this  intensifies 

131 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


the  view  that  regards  property  primarily  as 
an  instrument  for  profit.  For  them  gain  has 
scant  relation  to  service  and  power  scarcely 
any  to  responsibility.  Property  thus  spells 
privilege  and  privilege  is  a  right  minus  a 
function;  which  being  interpreted  means  a 
wrong  right!  Its  further  sin  is  that  it  sub¬ 
ordinates  creative  activity  to  passive  property. 
“To  have  enough  to  live  on”  becomes  the 
ideal;  “to  have  enough  to  live  with ”  becomes 
an  inferior  state,  from  which  no  one  must 
forego  an  opportunity  to  escape.  Graft  is 
nobler  than  function  in  a  viewpoint  such  as 
this.  One  can  easily  guess  what  influence  such 
a  viewpoint  has  on  youth! 

By  way  of  this  absentee  ownership  we  en¬ 
counter  the  financier.  He  deals  in  the  shares 
and  stocks  of  this  capital.  Those  who  pur¬ 
chase  them  from  him  generally  do  so  with  an 
eye  to  dividends,  and  not  to  creative  service. 
But  the  financier  has  a  genius  for  larger  things. 
Through  his  fertile  mediation  the  trust  has 
come  to  life.  Now  comes  what  one  is  tempted 
to  call  an  even  more  intimate  thing  than  the 
direct  control  of  life.  First  was  control  over 
the  producer;  now  comes  control  over  the 

consumer.  First  such  purchasing  power  as  a 

132 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 


man  managed  to  get  was  left  unmolested;  now 
it  is  invaded.  Both  output  and  prices  can 
now  be  controlled.  You  buy  at  the  figure 
fixed,  or  may  not  buy  at  all.  It  is  the  function 
of  industry  to  supply  us  with  instruments  for 
the  pursuit  of  goodness,  truth,  and  beauty; 
now,  these  very  instruments  turn  highwaymen. 
Better  things,  of  course,  can  be  said  for  the 
financier.  Some  deserve  our  praise  for  the 
spirit  and  scope  of  their  work.  As  Bishop 
McConnell  well  says:  “There  is  something  of 
social  service  in  the  accumulation  of  funds  to 
be  used  productively  even  though  we  cannot 
accurately  indicate  the  limits  of  the  service. 
The  ability  to  get  money  together  may  be  a 
social  virtue.  When  we  reflect  upon  the 
almost  inevitable  tendency  of  money  to  get 
away  from  the  ordinary  man  we  must  concede  at 
least  a  measure  of  justification  ...  in  the  social 
service  rendered  in  the  gathering  of  the  funds 
and  in  their  conservation.  This,  of  course,  is  not 
intended  as  an  exoneration  of  exorbitant  or  dis¬ 
honest  returns,  nor  is  it  intended  as  justification 
for  saddling  on  industry  the  burden  of  making 
profits  for  ‘water’  or  monopoly  values.”1  But 

1  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  Church 
Finance  and  Social  Ethics,  by  F.  J.  McConnell. 

133 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


for  the  purpose  of  this  chapter  we  need  to 
note  how  frequently  financiers  further  acquis¬ 
itiveness.  Lynn  Harold  Hough  says  truly: 
“When  a  man  invents  an  instrument  which 
humanity  needs,  and  as  a  result  secures  large 
returns,  he  is  receiving  the  reward  of  actual 
productiveness.  When  a  man  applies  his 
mind  to  making  the  largest  use  of  existing 
instruments  of  value  he  is  in  effect  adding 
to  their  number.  But  when  a  man  by  deft 
manipulation  secures  such  control  of  the  market 
or  such  a  relation  to  certain  stocks  that  he 
secures  a  return  without  rendering  a  corre¬ 
sponding  service,  he  is  not  a  producer.  In  a 
very  ignoble  sense  he  is  a  manipulator.  He  is 
a  parasite.  The  world  really  has  a  harder 
lot  because  he  is  living  in  it  and  all  his  gains 
have  an  odor  about  them  which  the  real  pro¬ 
ducer  recognizes  with  distaste.”  The  power 
wielded  by  these  manipulators  with  their 
amazing  “corner”  on  credit  staggers  imaginings. 
Can  this  stupendous  power  rightly  stay  in  the 
hands  of  these  men?  Will  it  ever  be  possible 
for  Wall  Street  to  be  the  street  called  Straight? 

Proprietorship  in  absentia  requires  for  its 
existence  the  employment  of  management. 

Management  in  itself  is  of  splendid  usefulness. 

134 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 


It  is  functional,  directive,  constructive.  But 
management  under  this  system  becomes  a 
different  thing.  The  financial  interests  put 
management  in  the  saddle,  but  do  not  permit 
it  to  hold  the  reins!  Managerial  success  is 
measured  not  by  the  degree  of  service  into 
which  it  guides  production  and  steers  industry, 
but  by  the  proportion  of  profits  at  which  the 
goods  are  produced.  Whether  they  “sell  it 
dear”  or  whether,  like  some  corporations,  they 
have  been  able  by  the  clubbing  of  their  re¬ 
sources  to  produce  a  commodity  cheaper  and 
better  than  if  it  were  manufactured  outside 
of  the  combine,  the  criterion  for  most  managers 
remains  to  “make  it  cheap,”  so  far  as  labor 
is  concerned.  This  makes  for  exploitation  first 
of  those  who  labor  and  next  of  those  who  buy. 
When  managers  are  obligated  to  provide  prof¬ 
its,  not  service,  for  their  seen  and  unseen  em¬ 
ployers,  they  are  sure  to  become  heartless  and 
dull  to  the  sense  of  right. 

Thought  needs  also  to  be  given  to  the  owner¬ 
ship  of  capital:  the  tools  of  production  or  the 
means  of  exchange;  land,  realty,  machinery, 
money.  Capitalism  is  the  private  control  of 
this  capital  (private  may  mean  one  person  or 

one  class).  Stewardship  remembers  that  cap- 

135 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


ital  is  a  thing — a  thing  for  a  task.  It  should 
be  at  the  service  of  life,  life  should  not  be  at 
the  service  of  it.  Capital  should  help  industry 
to  help  men.  “Those  who  own  it  should  no 
more  control  production  than  a  man  who  lets 
a  house  controls  the  meals  which  shall  be  cooked 
in  the  kitchen,  or  the  man  who  lets  a  boat 
the  speed  at  which  the  rowers  shall  pull.”2 
“A  society  is  rich  when  material  goods,  including 
capital,  are  cheap  and  human  beings  dear.  In¬ 
deed,  the  word  ‘riches’  has  no  other  meaning.”3 

And  thus  we  see  how  ownership  comes  to  be 
divorced  from  service.  This  economic  egotism 
breaks  down  all  moral  boundaries.  It  is  for¬ 
getful  of  function.  It  does  not  come  under 
the  tongue  of  true  Christian  report.  That 
“the  greatest  is  he  who  serves”  is  alien  lan¬ 
guage  to  it.  But  whatever  it  forgets,  the  stew¬ 
ard  must  remember  what  property  is  for : 
to  let  men  live  at  their  best.  And  if  it  does 
not  do  that,  “there  is  no  morning  for  it.” 

The  acquisitive  habit  results  not  only  in 
wrong  valuations  and  in  wrong  ownership, 
but  it  results  in  wrong  men.  It  is  in  respect 
to  people  that  Christians  are  sensitive.  If 

2  The  Acquisitive  Society,  R.  H.  Tavraey.  Harcourt,  Brace  &  Co., 
publishers,  New  York  City. 

• Ibid. 


136 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 


conditions  are  created  in  which  the  many  are 
made  subject  to  the  few;  if  the  many  have  to 
go  through  life  with  vitality  misapplied,  hopes 
lowered,  efforts  thwarted,  while  the  minority 
make  their  money  at  the  expense  of  the  finer 
life,  conditions  must  be  altered.  The  steward 
may  not  as  yet  see  clearly  how  this  can  be 
done;  but  to  see  that  it  ought  to  be  done  is  itself 
great  gain.  For  one  thing,  it  makes  the  masses 
less  than  God  intends  them  to  be.  Christ 
held  that  life  is  sacred,  because  of  its  potential 
possibilities  in  God.  He  held  that  life  must 
be  serviceable  and  not  self-centered;  that  its 
fulfillment  lies  in  good  will  rather  than  gain. 

In  the  acquisitive  order  men  are  inconsiderate. 
There  is  an  anti-Christian  basis  of  esteem. 
See  in  what  tragic  fashion  God’s  children 
regard  themselves!  Say  what  we  will,  the 
basis  of  esteem,  in  the  non-Christian  world, 
which  is  by  far  the  largest,  is  how  much  money 
one  has ,  not  how  much  good  one  does.  (Who 
shall  arise  to  say  that  the  ministry  is  alto¬ 
gether  exempt  from  a  standard  like  this?) 
Men  are  judged  by  acquisitions  rather  than  by 
function.  Not  even  the  most  money -mad  are 
content  with  money.  They  want  the  esteem 

of  others,  if  only  as  “self-made”  men!  People 

137 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


care  to  be  respected  as  persons,  not  as  pocket- 
books.  But  if  money  is  the  basis  upon  which 
we  honor  men,  what  honor  have  those  who 
serve  in  lowly  but  useful  work,  where  regard 
is  scanty?  The  really  tragic  consequence  of 
all  this  is  the  tendency  to  degrade  labor.  For 
laboring  men  must  have  self-esteem  and  must 
be  esteemed.  The  writer  attended  once  a 
meeting  of  employers  called  to  discuss  a  strike. 
He  was  struck  with  the  constant  talk  of  “cap¬ 
ital  and  labor.”  The  order  of  the  words  was 
not  once  reversed.  It  seemed  to  him  like  an 
impressive  summary  of  their  total  attitude, 
which  prized  profits  above  personalities.  Men 
go  wrong  when  esteem  for  themselves  or 
their  fellows  goes. 

The  acquisitive  order  tends  to  make  men 
unhappy  because  they  are  not  safe.  They  do 
not  know  what  day  the  wolf  will  gnaw  at  the 
door.  They  have  their  loved  dependents,  for 
whom  they  would  give  their  lives.  Yet  they 
are  unable  to  supply  them  with  necessities. 
This  makes  for  a  grim  and  desperate  mood; 
they  cannot  enter  into  joy.  If  the  masses  are 
sullen,  let  us  remember  why.  What  graver 
indictment  could  there  be  of  our  civilization 

than  that  the  mass  of  men  live  without  secur- 

138 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 


ity,  and  feverishly  grasp  all  they  can  get  to 
insure  the  future  of  those  they  love  and  them¬ 
selves?  This  too  compels  a  reaching  after 
money  that  serves  to  distort  life.  Property 
is  the  one  thing  that  can  keep  them  from  the 
poorhouse.  And  so  an  additional  halo  is 
thrown  about  property  and  life  once  again 
becomes  an  inordinate  search  for  gold. 

The  acquisitive  order  makes  for  discontent. 
Men  have  no  love  for  their  work.  First,  because 
they  have  no  right  to  it;  they  hold  it  by  grace 
of  another.  Second,  because  they  are  working, 
not  for  creative  expression,  but  to  pile  up 
profits  for  those  who  already  have  much. 
Third,  because  they  have  no  say  in  their 
industry;  sometimes  even  their  collective  ex¬ 
pression  is  taken  no  notice  of.  Fourth,  be¬ 
cause  they  are  working  under  a  sense  of  im¬ 
minent  personal  want.  Fifth,  because  their 
labor  is  sometimes  unproductive  and  some¬ 
times  misproductive.  There  is  something  damn¬ 
ing  to  men  when  they  have  to  make  shoes 
out  of  paper  or  when  they  have  to  manu¬ 
facture  habit-forming  drugs.  Sixth,  because  so 
many  get  no  chance  for  initiative;  they  have 
the  same  things  to  do  each  day  and  they  get 

to  do  them  by  rote;  men  become  machines. 

139 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


Seventh,  because  the  acquisitive  cult  shows  no 
fitting  appreciation  for  the  work  that  is  done. 
At  the  risk  of  repetition,  note  that  at  its  own 
scale  of  values  the  acquisitive  order  lacks  the 
sense  of  equity.  A  woman  immodest  enough 
to  go  in  for  burlesque  movies  can  earn  more 
in  one  month  than  Jane  Addams  could  get  in  a 
year.  An  adroit  manipulator  of  finance  can 
gather  more  out  of  one  “corner”  than  the 
most  eminent  educator  can  earn  in  all  his  life. 
Eighth,  men  hate  to  work  in  a  system  they 
do  not  trust.  It  outrages  their  sense  of  justice 
that  those  who  do  less  get  more  in  our  social 
order.  Ninth,  because  the  personal  contact 
of  employer  and  employee  has  so  largely  dis¬ 
appeared.  In  the  olden  days  when  the  “boss” 
was  frequently  in  the  homes  of  those  who 
worked  for  him,  there  was  a  genuine  chance 
for  them  to  understand  each  other’s  moods 
and  needs.  But  now,  with  miles,  managers, 
financiers  and  foremen  intervening,  misunder¬ 
standing  is  easy  and  hatred  runs  rife. 

The  acquisitive  order  thus  makes  men  unsym¬ 
pathetic.  Our  social  problems  can  never  be 
solved  by  mere  sociology.  The  human  element 
— the  psychological  aspects — lies  at  the  root 

of  them.  It  is  upon  them  that  their  solution 

140 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 


depends.  Jesus  stressed  the  need  for  the 
single  eye.  It  is  our  only  hope!  But  now 
men’s  outlook  is  divided  and  divisive.  Men 
crushed  by  greed  see  red.  Men  ruled  by 
greed  see  yellow.  Men  on  whose  eyes  there 
has  never  been  the  touch  of  Jesus  Christ  see 
others  only  as  things  to  be  used,  not  as  souls 
to  be  made.  A  laboring  man  whose  family 
exists  on  the  borders  of  starvation  will  see  the 
employer  only  as  an  archenemy,  to  be  hated 
and  despised.  On  the  other  hand,  when  a 
man  4 'wears  several  men’s  clothes,  eats  several 
men’s  dinners,  occupies  several  families’ 
houses,”4  something  dies  out  in  his  heart. 
Simplicity  and  sympathy  are  banished;  con¬ 
siderateness  departs.  A  man  who  seeks  only 
gain  destroys  those  moral  restraints  that  con¬ 
dition  its  pursuit.  He  surfeits  his  soul. 

But  perhaps  the  outstanding  crime  which 
the  acquisitive  habit  perpetrates  upon  men  is 
that  it  divides  them  on  an  arbitrary  basis. 
There  is  an  insane  difference  between  business 
and  'professional  life.  The  fallacy  of  this 
division  receives  tremendous  statement  in  R.  H. 
Tawney’s  book.  The  Acquisitive  Society.  There 

4  The  Acquisitive  Society,  R.  H.  Tawney.  Harcourt,  Brace  &  Co.,  pub¬ 
lishers,  New  York  City. 


141 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


are,  to  be  sure,  many  professional  men  of 
violent  acquisitiveness.  But  when  you  enter 
a  profession  you  are  expected  to  live  for  the 
service  you  can  render  rather  than  the  gains 
you  can  get.  Enter  into  business,  and  success 
is  now  measured  by  the  expansion  of  your 
property,  by  the  way  you  “make  it  pay.” 
But  industry  is  legitimate;  it  should  minister 
to  men’s  needs;  it  need  not  blush  for  shame. 
When  business  becomes  a  profession  in  the 
fine  sense  of  the  word  and  the  basis  of  success 
the  performance  of  the  function  which  is  ours, 
the  social  order  shall  have  subscribed  to  Chris¬ 
tian  stewardship.  The  important  work  is  not 
getting;  it  is  giving  your  very  best.  Where 
work  is  measured  by  profits,  there  is  antichrist. 

Lastly,  the  acquisitive  habit  leaves  the  world 
wrong.  It  does  not  strive  to  ameliorate  con¬ 
ditions.  It  makes  no  attempt  to  restore  the 
contact  between  the  individual  and  the  re¬ 
sources  for  his  existence;  it  does  not  attempt 
to  let  property  serve  personality.  On  the 
contrary,  it  multiplies  luxuries,  so  that  pro¬ 
duction  is  misdirected.  With  more  profit  in 
luxuries  than  in  necessities,  futilities  abound 
while  there  arises  a  shortage  of  the  needful 

things.  Profiting  makes  profiteers;  life  is  the 

142 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 


background  against  which  these  men  daub  the 
image  of  the  lewd  god  Mammon.  Amusements 
are  commercialized;  our  most  vulnerable  pas¬ 
sions  are  preyed  upon  for  gain.  Law  is  com¬ 
mandeered  for  greed,  while  unemployment 
stalks  abroad,  seeking  whom  it  may  devour. 
And  the  Realm  of  heaven,  the  democracy  of 
Jesus,  the  kingdom  of  God — call  it  what  you 
will — if  permitted  a  hearing,  is  patronized  as  a 
dream!  This  is  the  tragedy !  Against  it,  stew¬ 
ardship  hurls  all  the  weight  of  its  influence. 
It  is  not  for  want  of  proffered  panaceas  that 
things  remain  as  they  are.  Always  there  are 
those  who  are  out  for  revolution  by  force. 
Always  there  are  those  hurried  folks  who  have 
an  idea  that  things  can  be  changed  overnight. 
How  constantly  men  forget  that 

“The  social  states  of  human  kinds 
Are  made  by  multitudes  of  minds, 

And  after  multitudes  of  years 
A  little  human  growth  appears 
Worth  having,  even  to  the  soul 
Who  sees  most  plain  it’s  not  the  whole.”5 

This  does  not  mean  that  we  must  expect 
things  to  move  as  slowly  as  they  have  been 

6  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  Collected 
Poems,  by  John  Masefield. 


143 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


moving.  There  is  every  reason  to  believe  that 
social  progress  ought  to  be  accelerated  now. 
But  it  is  with  the  Christian  steward  that  the 
solution  lies.  He  holds  the  key  to  the  door 
of  the  temple  of  brotherhood.  What  if  his 
meekness  is  often  mistaken  for  weakness? 
“Blessed  are  the  meek,  for  they  shall  inherit 
the  earth.”  What  did  Jesus  mean?  Suppose 
he  meant  what  he  said,  that  in  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  those  filled  with  the  spirit  of  the 
Kingdom  would  be  the  masters  of  the  resources 
of  the  earth.  Obviously,  in  this  respect  the 
Kingdom  has  not  yet  come.  Fancy  grouping 
together  the  owners  of  the  earth  in  some 
vast  assembly — the  possessors  of  the  great 
landed  properties,  the  holders  of  the  mines, 
the  controllers  of  the  oil-wells,  the  masters  of 
the  railroad  and  steamship  lines,  and  then 
flaunt  over  them  a  banner  inscribed,  “Blessed 
are  the  meek,  for  they  shall  inherit  the  earth.” 
The  most  charitable  interpretation  of  such  an 
inscription  would  be  that  we  had  got  our  labels 
mixed.  And  yet  that  one  contradiction  stands 
stubbornly  in  the  path  of  the  spread  of  scrip¬ 
tural  Christianity  throughout  the  earth.6  The 
steward  sees  how  wrong  things  are  and  how 


6  Bishop  McConnell,  previous  quotation. 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 


right  they  ought  to  be.  He  will  not  rest  con¬ 
tent  until  the  reign  of  God  triumphs  in  the 
earth,  until  the  social  order  is  fully  Christian¬ 
ized.  He  therefore  leagues  himself,  to  utilize 
Wesley’s  phrase,  “offensively  and  defensively” 
with  every  good  agency  that  seeks  the  better 
day.  But  he  does  more ! 

He  soberly  tries  to  discover  how  far  he  can 
right  these  wrongs.  If  he  is  an  owner,  he  will 
resort  to  some  such  Christian  experiments  in 
industry  as  now  are  being  tried.  Hampered 
though  he  may  be  by  markets  and  competi¬ 
tion  and  by  publicity,  he  will  show  his  respect 
for  life  in  his  business  activities;  with  him 
service  will  supplant  gain.  As  an  investor  he 
will  try  to  avoid  shady  earnings  and  endeavor 
to  put  his  money  where  it  will  do  most  good 
— to  humanity.  If  it  falls  to  his  lot  to  have 
superintendence  over  men,  he  will  remember, 
despite  their  defects,  how  potential  their  spirits 
are.  He  will  not  mock  the  meaning  of  Christ 
by  piously  inviting  his  workers  to  “Come  to 
Jesus,”  when  it  is  evident  that  he  has  himself 
shut  the  door  of  his  business  in  the  face  of 
Christ!  If  he  is  an  employee,  he  will  remember 
that  service  is  ever  superior  to  gain;  that 

returning  good  for  evil,  even  in  industry,  is 

145 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


the  Christian  mode  of  life,  that  even  when  he 
does  not  make  much  he  can  be  much.  And 
he  will  not  mistake  silence  for  spirituality  when 
injustice  shows  its  head! 

Stewards  prize  property  for  personal  use  and 
unalterably  oppose  it  for  selfish  power.  The 
average  member  of  the  Christian  Church  has 
a  desire  to  do  right.  Men  do  not  belong  to 
voluntary  organizations  that  make  such  de¬ 
mands  upon  them  as  does  the  church  to-day 
unless  they  have  developed  to  a  considerable 
degree  the  spirit  of  their  Lord.  The  church 
is  shy  on  Shy  locks,  and  it  is  shy  of  them! 
Stewardship  asks  of  church  folks  that  they 
shall  look  out  on  the  world  through  the  eyes 
of  Jesus  Christ.  If  they  consent  to  do  this, 
stewards  are  confident  that  they  will  render 
one  verdict  and  only  one:  Personality  must  have 
precedence  over  property;  God  and  not  goods 
is  man’s  goal;  greed  must  go  for  good. 

There  are  many  hopeful  signs  of  this  steward¬ 
ship  both  among  employers  and  laborers.  We 
all  know  some  who  own,  as  well  as  some  who 
labor,  who  sincerely  strive  to  secure  a  Chris¬ 
tian  state  of  affairs.  They  struggle  against 
great  odds  to  express  in  business  life  their 
faith  in  the  reign  of  God.  They  are  pioneer 


ACQUISITIVE  OWNERSHIP 


souls  and  heroes.  It  is  easy  for  us  who.  have 
little  to  condemn  those  who  have  much.  It 
is  a  far  more  difficult  thing  for  men  who  are 
favored  in  life  to  take  upon  themselves  the 
form  of  a  servant;  to  account  it  ample  honor 
to  be  trustees  for  God.  It  is  a  happy  augury 
that  many  are  seeking  the  light.  The  writer 
thinks  now  of  a  business  man  who  during  the 
lengthy  illness  that  terminated  his  life  was 
concerned  with  this  very  question  of  letting 
his  business  bespeak  the  spirit  of  his  Lord. 
Doubtless  many  pastors  know  such  noblemen, 
and  the  cheering  truth  is  that  their  number  is 
on  the  increase. 

To  recapitulate:  Wrong  valuations  exist 
because  of  the  acquisitive  habit:  wrong  esti¬ 
mates  of  property,  rights,  and  life.  We  have 
to  contend  with  wrong  ownership,  by  which 
control  over  life  becomes  insidious.  Absentee 
ownership,  financial  manipulation,  hampered 
management,  capitalistic  claims,  result  in 
wronging  life.  In  a  state  of  things  like  this 
men  become  inconsiderate,  unhappy,  discon¬ 
tented,  unsympathetic,  divided  against  them¬ 
selves.  Meanwhile  the  world  is  left  wrong 
and  the  Christian  social  order  does  not  get  a 

chance.  Stewards  preach  with  their  practice, 

147 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


and  thus  unmistakably  reassert  the  prophetic 
word: 


“For  though  the  giant  ages  heave  the  hill 
And  break  the  shore,  and  evermore 
Make  and  break,  and  work  their  will; 

Though  world  on  world  in  myriad  myriads  roll 
Round  us,  each  with  different  powers, 

And  other  forms  of  life  than  ours. 

What  know  we  greater  than  the  soul? 

On  God  and  Godlike  men  we  build  our  trust.” 


148 


‘‘Now,  everyone  who  listens  to  these  words  of 
mine  and  acts  upon  them  will  be  like  a  sensible 
man  who  built  his  house  on  rock.  The  rain  came 
down,  the  floods  rose,  the  winds  blew  and  beat 
upon  that  house,  but  it  did  not  fall,  for  it  was 
founded  on  rock.  And  everyone  who  listens  to  these 
words  of  mine  and  does  not  act  upon  them  will 
be  like  a  stupid  man  who  built  his  house  on  sand. 
The  rain  came  down,  the  floods  rose,  the  winds 
blew  and  beat  upon  that  house,  and  down  it  fell 
— with  a  mighty  crash.” — Jesus. 

“There  walks  Judas,  he  who  sold 
Yesterday  his  Lord  for  gold, 

Sold  God’s  presence  in  his  heart 
For  a  proud  step  in  the  mart; 

He  hath  dealt  in  flesh  and  blood — 

At  the  bank  his  name  is  good, 

At  the  bank,  and  only  there, 

’Tis  a  marketable  ware.” 

— James  Russell  Lowell. 

“For  we  throw  our  acclamations  of  self-thanking, 
self-admiring, 

With,  at  every  mile  run  faster,  ‘Oh  the  wondrous, 
wondrous  age!’ 

Little  thinking  if  we  work  our  souls  as  nobly  as 
our  iron, 

Or  if  angels  will  commend  us  at  the  goal  of  pil¬ 
grimage.” 

— Elizabeth  Barrett  Browninq. 

150 


CHAPTER  VIII 
THE  WIDER  STEWARDSHIP 

Trusteeship  for  God  goes  beyond  business 
life.  There  are  other  realms  in  which  it  comes 
to  expression.  Property  has  wide  ramifica¬ 
tions.  The  pursuit  of  profit  may  be  traced  in 
every  place;  the  attempt  to  protect  the  system 
that  makes  it  possible  may  be  seen  on  every 
hand.  No  discussion  of  stewardship  would  be 
worthy  of  the  name  without  some  intimations 
of  these  larger  avenues  where  its  influence  must 
be  felt.  There  has  never  been  a  time  since 
Jesus  walked  the  earth  that  lofty  spirits  have 
not  practiced  stewardship.  In  two  well-known 
instances  American  Christians  have  rendered  a 
good  account  of  their  stewardship.  The  slave 
traffic  was  the  greatest  perversion  of  per¬ 
sonality  known  to  history.  Yet,  come  to 
think  of  it,  it  was  merely  the  acquisitive  in¬ 
stinct  carried  out  to  its  logical  end.  It  was 
not  easy  sailing  for  the  abolitionists.  Neither 
church  nor  state  spoke  in  unison  and  the  press 

was  divided.  But  of  their  final  triumph  we 

151 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


all  are  witnesses.  The  organized  liquor  traffic 
had  firmly  intrenched  itself  in  business,  politics, 
finance.  But,  thanks  to  devoted  women  and 
earnest  men,  the  Christian  Church  was  aroused 
to  its  sense  of  stewardship.  It  will  not  be  many 
years  now  before,  over  all  the  earth,  men  will 
celebrate  the  funeral  of  John  Barleycorn.  This 
sense  of  responsibility  for  the  welfare  of  the 
race  will  have  telling  effects  elsewhere;  and  in 
the  realm  of  property  we  may  count  on  steward¬ 
ship  to  see  the  right  thing  done.  For  a  belief, 
given  time  enough ,  will  express  itself  in  an  act. 
Folks  who  clamor  that  stewardship  shall  always 
be  able  to  say,  “Lo  here,  and  Lo  there,”  put 
the  cart  before  the  horse.  Yet  whenever  possi¬ 
ble  stewardship  will  register  itself  in  definite 
results.  Let  us  think  now  of  some  realms 
where  trusteeship  may  count. 

Consider  war.  For  property  has  much  to 
do  with  war.  To  be  sure,  it  is  not  the  only 
cause  of  war.  Racial  antagonisms,  religious 
differences,  rival  governments,  all  have  their 
influence.  But  that  property  figures  prom¬ 
inently  so  great  and  fair-minded  a  man  as 
James  Bryce  attests:  “There  is  still  .  .  .  the 
lust  for  territory,  .  .  .  the  desire  for  a  state 

to  acquire,  either  for  itself  as  a  state  or  for 

152 


THE  WIDER  STEWARDSHIP 


groups  of  its  citizens,  natural  sources  of  wealth 
valuable  for  the  purpose  of  producing  wealth.’’ 
Besides,  4 ‘commercial  or  financial  interests 
create  ill  feeling  and  distrust.”  Viscount 
Bryce  calls  our  attention  to  the  fact  that  “a 
remarkable  illustration  of  the  greed  shown  by 
capitalistic  groups  in  different  countries  to 
appropriate  natural  resources  has  recently 
appeared  in  the  case  of  the  mineral  oils,” 
and  speaking  of  radium,  the  rarest  and  most 
precious  of  metals,  he  says,  “No  one  can  guess 
what  would  be  the  fate  of  any  weak  com¬ 
munity  in  which  it  might  be  discovered  in 
abundance.”1  But  there  is  nothing  inherently 
divisive  in  property  as  such;  indeed,  inter¬ 
national  trade  could  well  be  a  powerful  guaran¬ 
tee  of  peace.  Now,  a  steward  has  the  right 
to  be  concerned  about  this  thing.  For  he  judges 
by  human  values;  and  a  war  which  took  a 
toll  of  millions  of  lives  and  a  greater  toll  in 
spiritual  values,  is  an  object  lesson  burned 
into  his  memory.  He  will  swear  eternal  enmity 
to  disruptive  jingoism.  Enough  evidence  is  in 
now  from  the  missionary  fields  to  show  that 
under  the  ministry  of  missionaries  property  can 

1  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  Inter¬ 
national  Relations ,  by  James  Bryce. 

153 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


create  good  will.  But  commerce  too  must  get 
the  spirit  of  considerateness.  It  too  must 
attempt  to  show  forth  the  spirit  of  the  Lord. 
If  Christianity  is  not  applicable  in  international 
relations,  we  stand  in  imminent  need  of  some 
superior  faith!  The  Christian  citizen  must 
prevail  upon  his  statesmen  to  work  righteously 
in  the  earth,  and  to  turn  a  deaf  ear  to  “interests” 
that  conflict  with  the  best  interest  of  the 
human  race.  For  war,  in  addition  to  its  human 
tragedy,  puts  upon  nations  crushing  burdens 
of  debt  and  taxation.  One’s  mind  reels  to 
read  the  statistics  of  national  debt  of  France, 
Great  Britain,  and  the  United  States.  Less 
than  $11,000,000,000  in  1913  and  over  $110,- 
315,000,000  in  1920,  to  say  nothing  of  the 
upkeep  of  armaments,  which,  thanks  to  the 
stewardship  of  some  Christian  men  and  the 
Washington  Conference,  has  at  least  for  a  time 
been  cut  down.  If  we  do  nothing  about  it, 
“how  shall  our  traitor  lives  be  guarded  from 
the  loathing  of  our  souls?”  What  can  we  do 
about  it?  Individually,  we  need  the  patience 
to  study  the  facts  and  to  give  them  circula¬ 
tion.  Church  people  will  find  such  informa¬ 
tion  now  available  through  the  Church  Peace 
Union  and  The  Federal  Council  of  Churches 

154 


THE  WIDER  STEWARDSHIP 


of  Christ  in  America.  We  can  encourage  our 
denominational  leaders  to  cooperate  with  such 
a  superb  agency  as  the  Commission  on  Inter¬ 
national  Justice  and  Goodwill  of  the  Federal 
Council.  Above  all  the  Christian  steward  can 
exert  his  influence  against  all  that  inferior 
patriotism  that  is  based  on  the  self-seeking 
motive,  and  exemplify  that  pure  type  to  which 
we  like  to  believe  that  our  fathers  pledged 
“our  lives,  our  fortunes,  and  our  sacred  honor/’ 
Shall  we  disappoint  their  hopes  and  disparage 
God’s  reign  on  earth? 

Closely  allied  to  this  is  the  matter  of  politics. 
Surely,  here  is  dire  need  for  an  invasion  by 
stewardship.  Mr.  Bryce  told  the  Institute  of 
Politics  that  in  every  country  he  had  been 
citizens  who  were  zealous  for  the  good  name 
of  their  country  came  to  say  to  him,  “Don’t 
judge  us  by  our  politicians,”  and  expressed  his 
conviction  that  “human  nature  does  not  wear 
its  most  engaging  aspect  in  public  life.”  This, 
by  the  way,  is  all  the  more  reason  for  Chris¬ 
tians  to  enter  political  life;  they  could  bring 
with  them  a  change  of  atmosphere,  in  which 
there  might  be  a  chance  for  the  healing  of 
the  nations.  Property  is  basic  to  politics. 

“Property,  in  its  various  forms  and  distribu- 

156 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


tion,  and  the  social  groups  which  arise  out  of 
the  economic  processes,”  form  “the  funda¬ 
mental  materials  for  the  science  of  govern¬ 
ment.”2  For  a  long  time  things  were  worse 
than  they  are.  Both  representation  and 
franchise  were  based  upon  property,  and  men 
were  not  given  the  vote  simply  because  they 
were  what  Carlyle  called  “unfeathered  bipeds.” 
Political  privileges  were  predicated  upon  eco¬ 
nomic  advantages.  But  a  change  for  the 
better  came.  In  France  Rousseau  began  to 
deny  the  doctrine  that  “the  transmission, 
alienation,  accumulation,  and  distribution  of 
wealth  bore  a  fundamental  relation  to  the  form 
and  practices  of  the  government,”  and,  with 
certain  qualifications,  exalted  “the  general 
win.  ”3  This  exaltation  of  man  as  man,  which 
the  Puritans  did  much  to  sustain,  came  to  its 
zenith  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
which  asserts  that  “all  men  are  born  free  and 
equal”  and  “governments  derive  their  just 
powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed.” 
But  do  they?  Or  do  the  economic  groups 
still  determine  political  action:  “Does  any  one 
think  that  a  thousand  farmers  or  laborers, 

*  The  Economic  Basis  of  Politics,  Charles  A.  Beard.  Alfred  A.  Knopf, 
publisher,  New  York  City. 

*  Opposite  quotation. 


156 


THE  WIDER  STEWARDSHIP 


going  on  about  their  tasks ,4  have  the  same 
influence  in  the  formation  of  a  protective  tariff 
bill  as  a  thousand  manufacturers  represented 
by  spokesmen  in  the  lobbies  and  committee 
rooms  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States?” 
Thus  our  theory  of  government  respects  per¬ 
sons,  while  our  practice  respects  'property. 
Here,  then,  is  a  fruitful  field  for  stewardship. 
It  is  no  simple  matter  to  make  property  sub¬ 
servient  to  people  in  politics.  Here  the  voice 
and  vote  of  the  Christian  may  be  abroad  in 
the  land.  He  can,  as  a  citizen,  demand  those 
measures  that  respect  personality  and  com¬ 
mend  the  politicians  who  hold  human  rights 
primary.  One  may  instance,  as  a  concrete 
example,  the  fact  that  we  find  ourselves  yet 
in  a  sad  plight  as  regards  child-labor  law. 
While  it  may  be  true,  as  Miss  Royden  thinks, 
that  we  in  America  have  a  pathetic  faith  in 
legislation,  we  are  sure  that  our  laws  must 
reflect  Christian  stewardship. 

Stewardship  must  also  impress  the  press. 
“Newspapers  and  magazines,”  to  quote  James 
Bryce  again,  “exist  not  for  the  sake  of  dis¬ 
seminating  true  facts  and  inculcating  sound 
opinions,  but  primarily  for  making  money  by 


4  Italics  mine. 


157 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


maintaining  and  increasing  tlie  circulation  of 
the  journal,  because  the  more  circulation  the 
larger  will  be  the  receipts  to  be  expected 
from  advertisements.  .  .  .  There  are  countries  in 
which  money  exercises  great  power,  buying  up 
journals,  and  suborning  them  to  pervert  facts 
and  to  sell  their  advocacy  of  opinion.”  Even 
though  “some  have  an  honest  wish  not  only 
to  describe  facts  correctly  but  to  inculcate 
views  they  think  sound,  not  many  resist  the 
temptation  to  say  what  will  please  their  read¬ 
ers.”5  That  the  press  often  tries  to  capture 
public  opinion  for  some  acquisitive  point  of 
view  is  all  too  evident.  We  need  not  only 
religious  journalism  but  journalism  that  is 
religious.  At  present,  though  some  church 
papers  are  still  compromised  in  their  adherence 
to  literalism  and  individualism,  one  can  find 
splendid  examples  of  trusteeship  in  the  religious 
press.  There  is  yet  much  work  to  be  done. 
Here  too  the  service  motive  must  become 
paramount.  It  will  take  courage  to  go  in  the 
teeth  of  profits.  Edward  Bok  and  the  Curtis 
Publishing  Company  led  the  way  years  ago  in 
refusing  to  carry  advertisements  for  unsavory 
products.  Who  can  doubt  that  the  spirit  of 


4  Previous  quotation. 


158 


THE  WIDER  STEWARDSHIP 


Jesus  will  beget  great  editors  who  will  refuse 
to  lend  their  talents  except  for  the  advocacy 
of  the  reign  of  God  on  earth?  The  press  must 
be  won  to  Christ.  It  must  be  able  to  say, 
not  as  a  theological  proposal,  but  as  evidence 
of  common  sense,  “These  things  are  written 
that  ye  may  believe  Jesus,  and  have  life  in 
his  name.”  Literature  can  serve  two  masters 
and  does.  It  must  serve  but  One.  Into  the 
freedom  of  the  press  and  the  freedom  of  speech 
space  does  not  permit  us  to  go.  It  goes  with¬ 
out  saying  that  stewards  cannot  but  believe 
in  fair  play.  They  are  committed  to  the 
Golden  Rule.  They  follow  One,  who,  being 
wise,  still  always  asked  those  who  were  far 
his  inferior,  “How  think  ye?”  Gamaliel  was 
for  giving  the  apostles  a  fair  hearing  when  the 
whole  Sanhedrin  was  for  throttling  them. 
This  is  worthy  of  emulation. 

Stewardship  must  be  exercised  in  the  realm 
of  education.  Here  also  one  is  privileged  to 
partnership  with  God.  The  steward  realizes 
the  ruin  wrought  by  ignorance.  The  examina¬ 
tions  in  connection  with  the  selective  draft 
during  the  war  revealed  an  average  intelligence 
of  thirteen.  If  this  is  the  average  here,  with 

our  cultural  facilities,  what  is  it  throughout 

159 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


the  world?  What  is  it  in  China  with  the  ratio 
of  literacy  one  in  twenty -three?  Some  organs 
of  “public  opinion”  limit  their  endeavors  to 
the  mind  of  the  ten-year-old !  A  babel  of 
tongues  is  child’s  play  compared  to  a  babel 
of  thought.  Clear  ideas  do  not  grow  in  mud¬ 
dled  minds;  suspicion  and  superstition  are  the 
weeds  that  flourish  there.  Many  succumb  to 
the  temptation  to  exploit  this  ignorance.  Quack 
medicines  have  their  chance  where  hygiene  is 
unknown.  Quack  literature  thrives  where 
minds  are  uncritical;  and  quack  religions  have 
their  innings  with  multitudes  whose  intelligence 
is  subnormal.  Not  only  will  the  steward 
realize  the  need  of  education  for  its  benefit 
to  life  and  its  safeguard  against  exploitation, 
but  he  will  wish  to  make  sure  that  it  is  in 
control  of  those  who  have  the  Christian  view 
of  life.  He  will  be  on  guard  against  the  attempts 
of  any  church,  out  of  lust  for  power,  to  seek 
to  dominate  the  educational  field,  and  to  change 
history  into  propaganda,  hierarchal  or  other¬ 
wise.  At  the  same  time  he  will  remember 
that  the  sure  cure  for  an  hysterical  view  of 
religion  is  an  historical  view  of  it.  He  will 
vote  to  put  the  educational  institutions  in  the 

hands  of  honest  men,  lovers  of  truth,  who 

160 


THE  WIDER  STEWARDSHIP 


esteem  the  service  motive  preeminent  in  life. 
He  will  be  instant  in  season  and  out  to  seek 
to  promote  religious  education,  which  will 
adorn  intellectuality  with  the  grace  of  intelli¬ 
gence  and  will  beget  the  conviction  in  young 
lives  that  God  matters  most.  He  will  recognize 
that  teachableness  is  a  Christian  achievement 
and  so  attach  himself  to  those  agencies  where 
he  can  be  informed  for  the  sake  of  the  reign 
of  God. 

Stewardship  cannot  evade  the  matter  of 
amusements.  Their  commercialization  is  a 
matter  of  deep  concern  to  all  believers  in  the 
supremacy  of  the  spiritual.  We  cannot  sub¬ 
mit  for  one  moment  to  the  commercialized 
interests  which  prey  for  gain  upon  every  im¬ 
pulse  that  human  life  holds  dear.  The  money 
element  has  come  to  dominate  the  amusement 
situation.  4 ‘Back  of  the  professional  stands  the 
commercial  promoter,  and  the  promoter  takes 
his  cue  from  the  cash  box  every  time.”  He  is 
not  seeking  chiefly  the  social  welfare.  Walter 
Rauschenbusch  has  well  stated  the  influence  of 
commercial  control:  “Pleasure  resorts  run  for 
profits  are  always  edging  along  toward  the 
forbidden.  Men  spend  most  freely  when  under 

liquor  or  sex  excitement;  therefore  the  pleasure 

161 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


resorts  supply  them  with  both.  Where  profit 
is  eliminated,  the  quieter  and  higher  pleasures 
get  their  chance.”  These  lepers  of  greed  have 
no  hesitancy  in  utilizing  the  one  day  distinctly 
dedicated  to  the  spiritual  for  the  sake  of 
exploiting  the  people  of  the  land.  Though 
the  Lord’s  Day  may  admit  of  a  more  liberal 
interpretation  than  obtains  in  some  quarters, 
the  steward  will  prefer  the  puritanical  to  the 
Satanical  any  day!  These  men  dethrone  for 
profit  the  day  enthroned  for  character.  The 
steward  must  sturdily  stand  sentinel  against 
the  encroachments  of  those  who  worship  the 
golden  calf  and  follow  after  Epicurean  gods. 
He  may  also  well  be  concerned  about  the 
scourge  of  “spectatoritus” — that  popular  Amer¬ 
ican  pastime  of  being  onlookers  rather  than 
participants  in  play.  Stewards  will  do  what 
they  can  to  further  those  amusements  that 
re-create  character.  By  example  and  patron¬ 
age  they  will  give  support  to  those  amusements 
from  which  the  profit  motive  is  effaced.  The 
steward  accepts  his  citizenship  as  trusteeship 
for  God. 

For  the  steward  the  consciousness  of  God 

means  a  concern  for  humanity.  Benjamin 

Franklin  was  impressed  with  his  responsibility 

162 


THE  WIDER  STEWARDSHIP 


to  God.  He  was  awed  by  the  thought;  to-day 
we  are  cheered  by  it.  Responsibility  alludes  to 
the  ability  to  respond .  The  followers  of  Christ 
have  had  this  and  have  it  still.  If  the  prac¬ 
tical  results  for  stewardship  in  a  single  life 
may  seem  small,  regard  the  collective  achieve¬ 
ments  of  organized  Christianity.  There  is 
something  about  these  achievements  that  sets 
one’s  heart  athrill  and  makes  one  devoutly 
thankful  to  be  a  member  of  the  church.  The 
church  has  often  been  derelict,  and  to-day 
often  hampers  itself  by  narrow  individualism 
on  the  one  hand  and  bureaucracy  on  the  other. 
But  still  its  achievements  are  momentous  and 
are  but  an  earnest  of  the  things  that  are  to 
come.  Fighting  against  the  odds  which  num¬ 
berless  ages  of  savage  inheritance  place  against 
them,  they  have  given  point  to  the  prophet’s 
exclamation:  “The  people  that  know  God  .  .  . 
shall  do  exploits.”  They  have  made  more 
headway  in  the  direction  of  the  stupendous 
social  changes  than  the  followers  of  all  other 
religious  leaders.  They  have  cast  out  the 
demon  of  slavery;  they  have  slain  autocracy; 
disease  withers  in  their  tread  and  ignorance 
takes  to  flight;  they  have  cast  out  exploita¬ 
tion,  and  democracy  is  at  dawn;  they  have 

163 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


smitten  tlie  liquor  traffic  until  it  writhes  in  its 
death  throes;  they  have  taken  the  world  for 
their  parish  and  set  the  child  in  its  midst; 
they  are  fighting  a  good  fight  with  greed,  with 
several  rounds  yet  to  go;  they  have  declared 
war  on  war;  they  have  banished  superstitions 
and  led  peoples  into  light;  to  the  narrowness 
that  is  within  them  they  are  themselves  taking 
the  sword!  Yet  Mr.  Wells  imagines  the  church 
in  doubt  as  to  what  Christ  meant  when  he 
said:  “I  came  to  bring  a  sword!”  They  are 
busy  now  with  personality.  “All  nations  he 
has  created  from  a  common  origin,  to  dwell 
all  over  the  earth,”  said  the  international  Paul 
of  his  international  God.  The  moment  one 
believes  in  the  preeminence  of  personality  one 
believes  in  the  essential  solidarity  of  the  race. 
They  are  therefore  at  the  Herculean  task  of 
purging  themselves  from  race-prejudice,  from 
the  acquisitive  motive,  from  the  habit  of 
greed.  This  is  as  big  a  piece  of  work  as  a 
man  can  set  himself  to.  Indeed,  it  is  too  big; 
he  can  only  do  it  through  God !  In  his  spirit 
the  followers  of  Jesus  are  trying  to  acclimate 
their  thought  to  a  race  consciousness  and  are 
learning  that  patriotism  must  be  a  stepping 

stone  to  higher  things.  They  are  striving  to 

164 


THE  WIDER  STEWARDSHIP 


elevate  others  to  a  similar  outlook  on  life. 
Finally,  they  are  adjusting  their  lives  to  work 
humanity  good.  They  follow  Christ  with 
sustained,  social  spirituality.  They  dedicate 
their  lives  in  devotion  to  God  and  man.  During 
the  life  time  of  Jesus  only  a  handful  traveled 
the  glowing  pathway  from  concession  to  him 
to  confession  of  him.  Since  then  the  stream 
has  widened  to  a  river,  the  river  broadened 
to  a  flood,  and  the  flood  is  becoming  an  ocean 
of  those  who  are  not  content  to  lie  inert  in 
the  cradle  of  some  creed,  to  bask  in  the  com¬ 
forts  of  some  self-ordered  social  order,  to 
disport  themselves  while  the  world  needs  life, 
but  who  take  sides  with  Jesus  Christ  in  his 
avowed  endeavor  to  lift  humanity  to  the  heart 
of  God.  For  this  cause  the  steward  seeks  to 
sanctify  every  trail  of  property. 


165 


“The  Lord  said,  ‘Well,  where  is  the  trusty, 
thoughtful  steward  whom  the  lord  and  master 
will  set  over  his  establishment  to  give  out  supplies 
at  the  proper  time?  Blessed  is  that  servant  if  his 
lord  and  master  finds  him  so  doing  when  he  arrives ! 
I  tell  you  plainly,  he  will  set  him  over  all  his  prop¬ 
erty.  But  if  that  servant  says  to  himself,  “My 
lord  and  master  is  long  of  arriving,”  and  if  he  starts 
to  beat  the  menservants  and  maidservants,  to  eat 
and  drink,  and  get  drunk,  that  servant’s  lord  and 
master  will  arrive  on  a  day  when  he  does  not  expect 
him  and  at  an  hour  which  he  does  not  know;  he 
will  cut  him  in  two  and  assign  him  the  fate  of  un¬ 
believers. 

He  who  has  much  given  him 

will  have  much  required  from  him, 
and  he  who  has  much  entrusted  to  him 
will  have  all  the  more  demanded  of  him.” 

— J  esus. 

“Above  the  maddening  cry  for  blood, 

Above  the  wild  war-drumming, 

Let  Freedom’s  voice  be  heard,  with  good 
The  evil  overcoming. 

Give  prayer  and  purse 
To  stay  the  Curse 
Whose  wrong  we  share, 

Whose  shame  we  bear, 

Whose  end  shall  gladden  Heaven!” 

— John  Greenleaf  Whittier. 


166 


CHAPTER  IX 


THE  STEWARDSHIP  OF  THE 
CHURCH1 

“You  see,”  said  Pope  Innocent  to  Saint 
Thomas  Aquinas,  as  they  watched  the  priests 
carrying  loads  of  gold  into  the  Vatican,  “you 
see,  the  day  is  gone  when  the  church  could 
say,  ‘Silver  and  gold  have  I  none.’  ”  “Yes, 
holy  father,”  replied  the  saint,  “and  the  day 
is  also  gone  when  she  could  say  to  the  cripple, 
‘Arise  and  walk.’  ”  But  the  Protestant  Church 
at  present  is  not  able  to  boast  of  its  wealth. 
To  be  sure,  it  has  large  resources,  but  they  are 
by  no  means  commensurate  with  the  task  it 
has  to  do.  What  is  wealth  to  an  individual 
would  be  poverty  for  a  nation,  and  a  phenom¬ 
enal  sum  to  a  person  would  be  but  a  beggarly 
allowance  for  institutional  Christianity.  The 
church  is  prevented  from  bidding  cripples  walk 
by  financial  limitations.  Its  resources  are  by 

1  The  impetus  for  the  writing  of  this  chapter  came  from  the  reading  of 
Bishop  McConnell’s  book,  Church  Finance  and  Social  Ethics.  The  author 
is  glad  for  this  opportunity  to  acknowledge  the  inspiration  received  from 
the  bishop’s  writings. 


167 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


no  means  consonant  with  the  work  it  has  to 
do.  Indeed,  to  put  it  thus  tamely  seems  well- 
nigh  sacrilege.  The  world  is  in  desperate  need 
of  the  good  news  of  God  and  of  the  realm  whose 
Master  Jesus  is.  If,  in  the  face  of  a  need  like 
this,  your  heart  does  not  command  your  bank 
account,  you  had  best  go  to  your  knees!  For 
if  the  pocketbook  does  not  first  seek  the  King¬ 
dom,  it  is  antichrist.  The  evangelization  of 
the  world  is  delayed  because  the  Christian 
people  have  withheld  from  the  church  the 
means  with  which  to  reach  mankind.  The 
church  can  hasten  Christ’s  reign  in  proportion 
as  the  funds  are  forthcoming. 

But  it  behooves  the  church  itself  to  practice 
stewardship.  What  it  asks  of  individuals  it 
must  do  collectively.  Of  course  it  will  have 
to  function,  at  least  to  a  large  extent,  through 
its  ministers  or  its  agents.  It  ill  becomes 
theological  schools  to  keep  silent  on  finance. 
That  some  theological  students  do  not  know 
how  to  write  a  check  properly  was  the  state¬ 
ment  of  the  registrar  of  a  prominent  theolog¬ 
ical  school.  It  may  not  sound  as  poetical  as 
the  aesthetic  sense  of  some  brethren  demands, 
but  it  is  none  the  less  a  fact  that  there  is  a 

business  side  to  the  ministry.  Let  us  have 

168 


STEWARDSHIP  OF  THE  CHURCH 


done  with  the  sorrow  of  this  situation.  It  is 
entirely  fitting  that  we  should  bemoan  it.  A 
minister  ought  to  be  engaged  in  spiritual  pur¬ 
suits,  and  the  material  side  should  be  looked 
after  by  others.  But  this  ideal  state  seldom 
exists.  The  affairs  of  the  average  church 
ruthlessly  tear  us  away  from  unperturbed 
communion  with  books  and  homiletics,  and, 
what  is  more  serious  still,  from  spiritual  service. 
By  the  exigencies  of  the  case  a  minister  is 
forced  to  be  not  merely  a  preacher  or  pastor 
but  manager  as  well.  These  are  the  heartless 
facts,  however  we  wish  the  ideal.  We  have  to 
make  the  best  of  an  unpleasant  but  serious 
predicament  which  is  not  in  the  least  mitigated 
by  the  boards  “overhead.’'  To  refuse  to  do 
the  work  and  persistently  proclaim  that  our 
hands  are  unsoiled  of  mammon  is  one  sure 
way  of  not  realizing  the  ideal.  The  rather, 
we  must  make  for  ourselves  and  our  cause 
friends  by  means  of  the  mammon  of  unright¬ 
eousness.  Nor  is  the  situation  utterly  hopeless. 
A  minister  may  through  his  business  contacts 
preach  the  gospel  of  the  Kingdom.  Finance 
is  not  necessarily  a  deterrent  of  spirituality. 
It  is  not  true  that  our  ministry  must  needs 

be  less  spiritual  because  money  matters  are 

169 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


part  of  it.  The  real  objection,  of  course,  is 
that  one  is  thus  compelled  to  devote  so  much 
time  and  energy  to  material  details,  whereas 
the  ordinary  field  is  laden  with  opportunities 
far  beyond  one’s  strength.  Raising  money  to 
raise  manhood  is  a  task  worth  while,  even  if 
a  preacher  has  to  do  it.  Financial  work  need 
not  mar  our  ministry  even  if  it  does  bar  our 
ministry  from  certain  lines  of  work.  Not 
the  quality  of  his  work,  but  the  quantity  may 
be  affected.  And  if  for  no  other  reason,  the 
minister  should  know  finance  because  this  is 
the  thing  his  people  are  so  busy  with.  But 
woe  betide  that  minister  who  indulges  in  sharp 
practices  in  his  business  for  the  church,  or 
who  fails  to  manifest  a  sensitive  social  con¬ 
science  concerning  its  affairs. 

The  officials  of  local '  churches  should  prac¬ 
tice  stewardship.  Mr.  Ford  is  credited  with 
the  observation  that  the  church  is  clearly  a 
divine  institution,  since  any  other  institution 
run  in  so  slipshod  a  way  would  have  gone  under 
long  ago!  In  ministerial  circles  one  often 
hears  the  complaint  that  business  men  do  not 
show  their  business  acumen  in  the  work  of 
the  church.  The  resources  of  the  church  must 

be  used  to  the  uttermost  for  the  welfare  of  the 

170 


STEWARDSHIP  OF  THE  CHURCH 


work.  Of  late  college  trustees  have  awakened 
out  of  their  complacency  and  opened  their 
properties  for  summer  schools  and  similar 
gatherings.  Among  some  church  officials  the 
notion  prevails  that  the  church  building  is 
the  private  property  of  an  elect  membership. 
A  sense  of  stewardship  will  mean  that  the 
resources  of  property  as  well  as  of  finance  will 
be  utilized  to  the  utmost.  Who  has  not  known 
official  members  who  thought  more  of  saving 
windows  and  chairs  than  of  saving  boys? 

The  church  at  large  must  keep  the  service 
motive  evident  in  its  ownership.  It  must  even 
subordinate  devotion  to  a  denomination  to 
the  spirit  of  service.  In  this  respect,  at  least, 
business  can  teach  the  church.  It  is  forever 
on  the  alert  for  the  elimination  of  excess  ma¬ 
chinery.  And  it  never  hesitates  to  invest 
where  there  is  a  prospect  of  returns.  But 
churches  are  still  maintained  where  the  field 
is  already  well  covered;  and  for  the  sake  of 
“prosperity”  often  move  out  of  fields  where 
the  need  is  imperative.  The  smaller  towns 
bear  ample  testimony  to  the  prevalence  of  the 
first  blunder,  and  the  larger  cities  tell  a  sad 
tale  of  the  second  one.  We  must  keep  the 

service  motive  supreme  in  administration, 

171 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


which  means  that  we  must  keep  it  supreme  in 
those  intrusted  with  administration — not  an 
easy  thing  to  do.  Bishop  McConnell  remarks 
that  it  would  shock  our  denominational  agents 
to  see  Jesus  at  work  preaching  the  gospel  of 
the  Kingdom  and  then  failing  to  follow  up 
his  work.  This  remark  is  pertinent.  No,  they 
must  have  statistics.  They  must  have  a 
million  tithers  in  a  given  time;  they  must 
know  that  so  many  thousand  are  registered 
for  life  service;  and  these  must  be  adminis¬ 
tered  from  a  central  office.  This  is  the  spirit 
which  puts  the  dollar  mark  upon  the  minister. 
Do  the  collections  increase?  Is  the  member¬ 
ship  larger?  Are  there  great  congregations? 
Then  he  is  deemed  a  success.  It  is  hard  in  the 
count  of  quantity  to  make  quality  count.  For 
the  church  to  keep  keyed  to  stewardship  it 
must  exercise  the  trusteeship  of  the  spiritual 
in  its  soliciting.  It  must  be  as  much  con¬ 
cerned  with  the  honesty  of  the  appeal  as  with 
the  results  of  it.  This  may  prove  difficult 
for  some  money  raisers !  Money  for  the  church’s 
projects  must  not  be  obtained  under  false 
pretenses.  It  must  be  clearly  understood  that 
it  does  not  go  for  the  promulgation  of  one’s 

pet  theological  notions,  or  one’s  political  theory. 

172 


STEWARDSHIP  OF  THE  CHURCH 


It  must  be  clear  that  the  church  will  use  its 
resources  to  honestly  discover  the  will  of  God 
and  to  make  that  will  operative  in  every  realm 
of  life.  There  is  a  golden  mean  between  rash¬ 
ness  and  criminal  silence,  and  the  church  must 
discover  it.  One  is  sometimes  heartened  to  see 
how  keenly  some  splendid  layman  sees  through 
the  smokescreens  raised  by  careful  solicitors. 
Most  churchmen,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  would 
rather  you  differed  from  them  than  that  you 
dared  not  follow  out  the  logic  of  your  faith. 
Numbers  of  laymen  support  ministers  who 
do  not  support  their  economic  theories.  They 
feel  that  wisdom  shall  not  die  with  them,  and 
they  can  chance  the  church’s  ministry  dis¬ 
covering  some  way  out  of  the  bewildering 
tangle  in  which  man  is  as  yet.  They  are 
great-hearted  enough  to  pay  for  the  search  of 
the  truth  even  though  they  themselves  have 
not  found  it,  or  cannot  agree  that  the  degree 
to  which  church  leaders  claim  to  have  found 
it  is  of  much  consequence.  They  concede  the 
church  the  right  to  seek  such  truth  as  is  to 
be  found,  unhindered  by  economic  interests 
and  by  the  limitations  which  prevalent  cus¬ 
toms  set.  There  are  not  many  wealthy  men 

who  try  to  control  the  church,  although  some 

173 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


of  them  try  hard.  Men  are  too  fair  at  heart. 
They  would  rather  have  the  church  err  on  the 
side  of  freedom  than  that  it  be  enslaved. 
Recent  financial  campaigns  have  taught  the 
church  that  the  bulk  of  its  gifts  come  not  from 
the  excessively  rich  but  from  the  great  “middle 
class”  and  the  rank  and  file  of  folks.  Soliciting 
must  be  honest,  not  because  it  is  the  best 
policy,  but  because  if  it  fails  to  be  such  the 
church  lies! 

The  church  must  show  stewardship  in  its 
expenditures.  The  church  must  be  made  effec¬ 
tive,  not  only  through  a  trained  and  equipped 
leadership,  which  in  our  present  order  will 
have  to  be  well  paid,  but  through  adequate 
expenditures  for  religious  education.  It  may 
have  to  pay  less  for  music  and  more  for  trained 
teachers,  although  it  might  well  have  both. 
But  it  needs  a  sense  of  values  that  spends 
money  where  it  will  do  most  good.  And  the 
child  must  be  set  in  the  midst  of  its  expendi¬ 
tures!  Also  there  must  be  education  of  the 
grown-up  folks.  The  church  is  much  mis¬ 
understood.  It  needs  publicity  to  correct 
opinion.  We  must  attack  the  religious  ignor¬ 
ance  and  indifference  of  the  men  in  street 

and  factory  and  mine  in  the  language  which 

174 


STEWARDSHIP  OF  THE  CHURCH 


they  speak.  We  must  also  introduce  many 
churchmen  to  the  church!  We  need  profoundly 
simple  writings  which  the  common  people  will 
read  gladly.  Here  lies  an  almost  unexplored 
field  for  the  Christian  Church,  though  the 
sects  have  been  wiser  in  their  day,  and  have 
published  their  propaganda  in  almost  every 
tongue.  Let  us  have  a  ministry  of  good  liter¬ 
ature  and  of  the  literature  of  goodness.  The 
church  must  spend  its  money  where  it  can  do 
most  good  in  the  winning  of  life  to  Christ. 
One  who  has  heard  Dr.  Helms  describe  the 
senseless  efforts  in  which  the  church  has  in¬ 
dulged  in  trying  to  entice  beauty-loving, 
musical  Italians  to  attend  services  for  worship 
in  a  dilapidated  old  store  in  some  forlorn 
neighborhood,  will  realize  that  architecture  and 
art  may  perform  a  genuine  ministry.  The 
bargain-counter  spirit  is  inadequate  to  win 
men  to  Christ.  The  church  must  spend  its 
funds  wisely,  but  generously,  to  supply  the 
spiritual  needs  on  behalf  of  God. 

A  word  may  also  be  said  about  the  church 
as  an  investor.  Here  surely  the  church  must 
show  a  keen  sense  of  stewardship.  To  be  sure, 
the  church  makes  a  better  use  of  the  earnings 

on  its  investments  than  individuals  usually  do. 

175 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


But  that  does  not  exempt  it  from  deep  con¬ 
scientiousness  as  to  where  its  funds  are  placed. 
Bishop  McConnell  suggests  that  there  should 
be  a  “white  list”  of  investments  available,  so 
that  one  might  have  ample  guidance  as  to  just 
which  investments  would  be  most  socially 
serviceable.  He  points  out  that  the  church 
should  make  sure  to  avoid  those  investments 
where  the  returns  are  suspiciously  large,  and 
those  that  are  not  unquestionably  honest.  The 
further  danger  is  indicated  that  such  invest¬ 
ments  are  likely  to  compromise  the  church  in 
favor  of  the  existing  social  order.  If  the  church 
is  unable  by  the  force  of  circumstances  to  keep 
free  from  entangling  alliances,  it  needs  to  make 
very  sure  that  it  knows  the  way  out  of  them. 

And  as  an  employer  the  church  must  mani¬ 
fest  stewardship.  It  should  see  to  it  that 
the  service  of  its  servants  is  not  hampered  by 
lack  of  funds.  On  the  other  hand,  it  behooves 
its  servants  not  to  make  excessive  claims. 
The  economic  differences  that  now  keep  Chris¬ 
tian  ministers  from  a  more  perfect  brotherhood 
must  wound  the  heart  of  God.  Any  young 
man  in  the  ministry  who  has  been  promoted 
over  his  brothers  in  the  matter  of  income  well 

knows  what  jealousy  often  follows  in  its  wake. 

176 


STEWARDSHIP  OF  THE  CHURCH 


There  must  be  some  better  way  for  the  servants 
of  Jesus  Christ.  There  would  be  a  different 
way  had  churches  the  stewardship  view.  Sec¬ 
retaries,  superintendents,  and  even  bishops,  are 
in  danger  of  getting  what  in  labor  circles  is 
somewhat  inelegantly  called  4 The  employer’s 
mind.”  That  the  majority  of  them  exercise 
their  functions  with  true  humility  and  large 
humanity  bespeaks  volumes  for  what  the  im¬ 
pact  of  God  can  do  for  men.  Even  janitors 
have  right  to  fullness  of  life.  When  the  church 
has  work  to  be  done,  the  chief  consideration 
should  scarcely  be  as  to  how  cheaply  it  can  be 
secured;  it  must  have  thought  for  those  who 
labor  for  it.  All  in  all,  it  would  be  a  wonder¬ 
ful  thing  if  the  church  could  make  “a  divine 
revelation  through  its  existence  in  material 
conditions.”2  And  what  is  to  prevent  its  doing 
so,  if  the  spirit  of  stewardship  dominates  its 
life? 

The  church  has  yet  another  duty  in  this 
matter  of  stewardship.  It  needs  to  examine 
the  motives  of  those  who  contribute  toward  it. 
It  has  a  considerable  duty  as  a  receiver  of 
wealth.  It  should  understand  clearly  why 
people  give  to  it.  All  too  frequently  men  have 


2  Bishop  McConnell. 


177 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


mistaken  giving  for  stewardship,  and  have 
thought  that  money  settles  Christian  obliga¬ 
tions.  The  church  must  emphasize  the  service 
motive  in  giving.  In  this  respect  the  church 
has  been  grossly  gullible.  We  misjudge  gen¬ 
erosity.  We  need  to  emphasize  motives.  The 
postulate  of  psychologists  that  men  can  seldom 
be  trusted  to  narrate  their  own  experiences 
holds  good  when  we  have  to  ask  men:  Why 
do  you  give?  But  this  is  a  prerogative  which 
the  Christian  Church  must  keep.  Neither  size 
nor  circumstance  should  be  permitted  to  serve 
as  a  cloak  to  give  low-motived  giving  the 
appearance  of  a  high-motived  act.  The  church 
must  accept  no  substitute  for  stewardship. 
Browning  somewhere  says  it  is  “not  what  man 
does  which  exalts  him,  but  what  man  would 
do.”  We  ought  to  differentiate  between  differ¬ 
ent  types  of  giving  in  order  that  stewardship 
may  not  be  cast  from  its  throne.  Some  folks 
seem  to  “give  by  nature”;  it  is  a  matter  of 
self -gratification;  there  is  no  sense  of  surrender 
to  the  will  of  God;  there  is  often  little  thought 
as  to  whether  the  gift  is  commensurate  with 
the  ability  of  the  giver  or  the  need  of  the 
project.  Sometimes,  apparently  large  gen¬ 
erosity  is  due  to  the  desire  of  the  giver  to 

178 


STEWARDSHIP  OF  THE  CHURCH 


dominate  socially  or  administratively  the  church 
to  which  he  contributes,  or  to  further  the 
interest  of  his  business  by  thus  gaining  a  good 
name.  -  It  has  the  form  of  giving,  but  denies 
the  power  thereof.  In  some  of  the  giving  the 
competitive  habit  of  the  business  world  is 
introduced.  A  man  "is  not  going  to  let  any¬ 
body  beat  him”  in  the  size  of  his  gift.  More¬ 
over,  to  appear  more  generous  than  others  is 
a  fit  subject  for  self-congratulation.  How 
widespread  this  unselfish  selfishness  is  may  be 
noted  from  the  shrewd  schemes  of  professional 
solicitors  to  "shame”  folks  into  large  giving, 
such  as  the  persuading  of  some  who  are  "lower” 
in  social  station  to  subscribe  excessively.  Surely 
such  conduct  has  no  claim  to  the  label  of  giving 
it  wears.  Then  there  is  the  legalistic  type. 
Here  we  enter  a  different  atmosphere.  Here 
is  an  inkling  of  spirituality.  Allegiance  to  law 
forces  the  giving.  To  them  the  Bible  says  so; 
God’s  law  demands  it.  "Is  it  not  written  in 
the  book  of  the  law?”  For  them  the  obliga¬ 
tion  to  give  is  a  sort  of  spiritual  inhibition 
acting  as  a  divine  brake  on  human  selfishness. 
They  give  because  they  must,  not  because  they 
may.  Sometimes  people  give  on  a  basis  of 

divestment.  Here  it  is  a  duty  to  an  inner 

179 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


decree,  not  to  an  outer  word.  It  is  fostered 
by  the  renunciation  motive.  It  comes  in  the 
feeling  that  certain  things  are  dear  to  us  and 
just  because  they  are  dear,  make  acceptable 
offerings  to  divinity.  It  is  the  precursor  of 
stewardship  in  many  pagan  cults.  Carried  over 
into  our  day,  it  says  not  so  much,  you  must 
give  as  you  ought  to  give.  It  is  the  requirement 
of  life  rather  than  the  acquirement  of  it.  But 
Christian  stewardship  is  nothing  short  of 
surrender  to  the  ideal  that  love  is  life.  “God 
so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  only- 
begotten  Son.”  His  highest  self-expression  is 
his  highest  self-offering.  Thus  stewardship 
says  that  we  find  our  best  when  we  give  our 
best.  The  trouble  with  much  of  our  giving 
is  that  it  is  in  response  to  isolated  emotional 
stimuli.  But  stewardship  keeps  the  heart 
exposed  to  the  spiritual.  Freely  it  has  re¬ 
ceived;  freely  it  gives.  The  church  must  know 
why  men  give,  and  must  beget  within  its 
members  this  sense  of  discrimination.  Stew¬ 
ardship  comes  to  say  that  “the  gift  without 
the  giver  is  bare.”  The  church  must  bestow 
credit  where  credit  is  due,  and  it  must  make 
sure  to  proclaim  that  generosity  can  never  be 

a  substitute  for  stewardship. 

180 


■ 


,  „t  -  •  •'  .  -  •  '  ; 

•  > 


i 


t 


“Now  the  Jewish  passover  was  near,  so  Jesus 
went  up  to  Jerusalem.  There  he  found,  seated 
inside  the  temple,  dealers  in  cattle,  sheep  and 
pigeons,  also  money-changers.  Making  a  scourge 
of  cords,  he  drove  them  all,  sheep  and  cattle  to¬ 
gether,  out  of  the  temple,  scattered  the  coins  of 
the  brokers  and  upset  their  tables,  and  told  the 
pigeon-dealers,  ‘Away  with  these !  My  Father’s 
house  is  not  to  be  turned  into  a  shop!’  (His  dis¬ 
ciples  recalled  the  scripture  saying,  I  am  consumed 
with  zeal  for  thy  house.)” — The  Gospel  According 
to  John. 

“No  change  in  the  economic  methods  of  con¬ 
ducting  the  business  of  the  world  will  avail  to 
bring  peace  at  home,  for  covetousness  is  too  strong 
a  passion.  It  is  only  the  church  which  can  con¬ 
vince  the  world  that  its  misery  is  the  result  of  the 
violation  of  the  fundamental  law  of  human  brother¬ 
hood.  The  same  is  true  of  the  purification  of  pol¬ 
itics,  and  the  education  of  the  young,  and  the  sancti¬ 
fication  of  the  family.  All  these  depend  upon  the 
application  of  the  principles  revealed  by  Jesus, 
and  only  the  disciples  of  Jesus  can  convince  men 
that  these  are  essential.” — Leighton  Parks. 

“Then  faded  and  vanished  the  last  frontier 
Of  hate,  when  the  soul’s  universal  tongue 
Uttered  the  great  word,  ‘Brother!’  ” 

— Robert  Haven  Schauffler. 


182 


CHAPTER  X 

TEACHING  STEWARDSHIP 

The  church  must  teach  stewardship.  This 
is  in  perfect  accord  with  what  it  is  here  to  do. 
It  exists  to  keep  alive  in  men  the  consciousness 
of  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord.  It  must 
evangelize  the  world  with  the  good  news  about 
him.  It  must  bring  mankind  to  God.  People 
never  rise  above  their  conception  of  God.  And 
so  there  comes  the  question.  What  sort  of  God 
does  it  teach?  Does  it  teach  an  acquisitive  God 
or  one  self-giving  in  service?  If  an  acquisitive 
God,  self-seeking  is  righteousness;  if  a  sac¬ 
rificial  one,  love  alone  is  right.  But  perhaps 
the  church  itself  has  not  clearly  set  him  forth. 
Then  the  question  we  have  to  ask  is,  What 
sort  of  God  should  it  teach  to  accord  with 
Jesus  Christ? 

The  scarcity  of  stewardship,  the  fact  that  it 
is  but  partly  practiced  by  so  many  Christian 
folks,  can  be  laid  to  the  inadequate  concep¬ 
tions  of  God  which  still  prevail.  Account  for 

it  as  we  will,  relatively  few  have  found  the 

183 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


God  who  lived  in  Christ.  This  is  the  more 
amazing  in  view  of  the  simplicity  with  which 
Jesus  pictured  him.  It  is  worthy  of  our  notice 
how  Jesus  thought  of  God.  Did  he  describe 
him  as  one  whose  chief  aim  is  to  profit,  whose 
end  is  to  get  all  he  can?  He  spoke  of  God  as 
Father.  Had  he  resembled  some  stewardship 
“leaders/’  he  would  have  taught  him  as  Creator, 
but  that  did  not  occur  to  him.  There  are 
other  truths  about  God  which  he  might  have 
emphasized,  but  he  did  not.  He  did  not, 
because  he  wanted  to  put  first  things  first. 
The  men  who  gave  the  Apostles’  Creed  the 
form  which  it  now  bears  had  the  truth  of  it. 
They  said:  “I  believe  in  God,  the  Father  Al¬ 
mighty,  Maker  of  heaven  and  earth.”  They 
gave  God’s  Fatherhood  precedence  over  his 
Creatorship.  They  put  first  things  first.  When 
Jesus  described  God,  when  he  talked  of  him 
or  to  him,  he  spoke  a  word  that  gets  to  the 
heart  of  us — and  him.  He  called  him  Father. 
It  was  a  habit  with  him  to  call  God  Father. 
“My  Father,”  he  said  when  a  boy.  “Your 
Father,”  he  told  his  disciples.  “Father,”  he 
cried  when  his  tortured  body  hung  upon 
Calvary.  In  such  a  conception  there  is  no 

room  for  the  dominance  of  greed.  The  Chris- 

184 


I 


TEACHING  STEWARDSHIP 

tian  thought  of  God  is  primarily  that  of  an 
intimate  and  intensely  interested  Person,  who 
is  not  far  from  any  of  us,  and  whose  will  is 
our  best.  This  is  the  only  thought  of  God 
that  is  able  to  redeem  men  from  sin,  which  is 
selfishness,  to  salvation,  which  is  love.  “God 
is  the  most  deeply  obligated  being  in  the 
universe.”  “The  judge  of  all  the  earth  must 
do  right.” 

And  thus  it  comes  that  stewardship  joins 
hands  with  evangelism .  It  is  the  function  of 
evangelism  to  win  men  to  God.  Evangelism 
can  succeed  only  as  it  shows  God  in  his  true 
light.  The  big  business  of  showing  men  God 
has  not  proved  child’s  play  anywhere  along  the 
line.  Men  have  nearly  always  thought  un¬ 
worthy  thoughts  of  Deity.  They  have  per¬ 
sistently  buried  divine  perfection  under  human 
frailties  in  their  speech  of  God.  Even  theol¬ 
ogy  has  been  derelict  to  its  privilege,  in  that 
it  tried  to  adjust  God  to  its  systems,  instead 
of  adjusting  its  systems  to  God.  It  is  still 
difficult  for  the  average  person  to  get  any 
conception  of  God  except  that  which  is  steeped 
in  the  thought  and  terminology  of  mediae valism. 
The  news  is  not  broadcast  yet  that  God  is  no 

autocrat.  Some  years  ago  Mr.  Wells  came 

185 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


forth  with  “the  surprised  air  of  a  conjurer” 
out  of  the  “dead  museums  and  miles  of  misery” 
of  ancient  religious  views.  At  that  time  he 
called  his  “discovery”  “God  the  Invisible 
King,”  despite  the  fact  that  in  most  evangel¬ 
ical  thinking  the  kingship  of  God  (while 
acknowledged)  is  emphasized  less  and  less, 
while  the  kingdom  of  God  is  coming  to  the  fore. 
Pell-mell  in  pursuit  of  a  monarchlike  God 
troop  bands  of  novelists  who  write  like  theo¬ 
logians  with  the  slight  difference  that  in  their 
writings  you  have  to  wade  through  a  cribful 
of  rubbish  to  get  at  a  kernel  of  truth.  Evan¬ 
gelism  must  rid  men’s  thoughts  of  a  despotic 
Deity  who  demands  that  toll  and  tribute  shall 
be  tendered  at  his  courts.  It  must  show  the 
glory  of  God  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ,  who 
“knowing  that  the  Father  had  given  all  things 
into  his  hands,  .  .  .  washed  the  disciples’  feet.” 
It  must  laud  the  service-motive  which  actuates 
our  God.  It  is  alleged  that  Mr.  Ingersoll  was 
never  more  popular  with  his  audiences  than 
when  he  held  up  to  derision  the  Old-Testament 
accounts  which  claim  the  sanction  of  God  for 
the  cruelties  they  record,  and  climaxed  this 
with  the  question:  “What  do  you  think  of  a 

God  like  that?”  But  to-day  the  tables  are 

186 


TEACHING  STEWARDSHIP 


turned.  It  is  now  the  Christian  Church  which 
acclaims  its  ardent  abhorrence  of  distorted 
pictures  of  God.  Izaak  Walton  tells  us  that 
Dr.  Donne  left  his  successer,  Dr.  Winniff,  a 
picture  called  “The  Skeleton.”  The  church  is 
weary  of  having  bequeathed  and  of  bequeath¬ 
ing  pious  pessimisms  of  a  proprietor-Lord. 
Owner  though  he  is,  he  is  Father  first  of  all! 
We  must  redeem  the  conception  of  life  by  the 
conception  of  God.  Herman  Hagedorn’s  por¬ 
trayal  of  one  who  neglected  his  privilege  ought 
to  admonish  our  hearts: 

“If  I  could  only  wash  out  of  my  eyes 
The  look  she  gave  me.  Oh,  the  heights  and  deeps 
Of  that  reproach!  It  was  as  though  she  cried, 

I  wanted  strength  and  you  had  none  to  give  me, 

I  wanted  God,  and  you  had  only  words!”1 

Of  course,  there  comes  the  objection:  That 
makes  your  God  too  “soft.”  Nothing  could 
be  further  from  the  truth.  For  there  is  an¬ 
other  side  to  the  task  of  evangelism.  In  order 
to  win  men  to  God,  it  must  not  only  show 
forth  the  beauty  of  his  holiness  but  the  dis¬ 
parity  between  him  and  their  unholy  lives. 
There  must  be  conviction  of  sin — the  sin  of 

1  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company  from  The  Heart 
of  Youth,  p.  157,  by  Herman  Hagedorn. 

187 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


selfishness.  When  a  friend  once  told  Robert 
McCheyne  that  he  had  just  preached  on  hell, 
the  famous  preacher  said:  4 ‘And  were  you 
able  to  do  it  with  tenderness ?”  Done  in  the 
spirit  of  Jesus,  no  work  will  have  greater  results 
among  the  adults  than  preaching  against  the 
sin  of  greed.  Some  one  has  remarked  that 
Paul,  writing  to  the  early  saints,  incorporated 
this  advice:  “Let  him  that  stole,  steal  no 
more.”  Why  such  advice  to  the  churches? 
Because  they  stood  in  need  of  a  perfect  ethical 
conception  of  their  religious  experience.  And 
if  Christians  need  thus  to  be  convinced  of  the 
error  of  self-seeking,  how  much  more  need 
those  who  have  never  turned  their  hearts  to 
Jesus  Christ!  They  must  be  faced  with  the 
question  whether  they  have  not  bought  their 
money  with  their  lives,  whether  they  have  not 
foundered  on  greed.  Selfishness  blasphemes  the 
Holy  Spirit;  it  laughs  God  to  scorn.  It  cannot 
be  forgiven  because  it  cannot  give.  The 
gospel  of  service  and  love  has  no  easy-going 
God.  He  tramples  with  resistless  wrath  on  all 
mammonism ! 

One  cannot  preach  the  stewardship  message 
by  an  occasional  sermon.  It  must  be  the 

atmosphere  by  which  sermons  are  charged. 

188 


TEACHING  STEWARDSHIP 


A  man  needs  clean  hands  and  a  pure  heart 
to  proclaim  this  truth.  In  his  own  spirit  and 
on  his  knees,  he  must  beat  back  the  gain 
motive  and  keep  unsullied  in  his  life  the  spirit 
of  saviourhood.  This  is  no  easy  thing.  He 
must  fight  if  he  would  reign;  and  the  fight  is 
on  the  battlefield  of  his  self-interest. 

“Judas,”  says  P.  W.  Wilson  in  The  Christ 
We  Forget ,  “wanted  the  power  of  money,  be¬ 
cause  that  power  seemed  to  make  him  inde¬ 
pendent  of  the  Saviour.  .  .  .  He  began  by  deny¬ 
ing  that  adoration  of  the  Saviour  is  worth 
three  hundred  pence.  He  ended  by  valuing 
the  Saviour’s  life  at  thirty  pieces  of  silver.”2 
That  was  a  great  word  Paul  delighted  so  to 
use — Karisma — “free  gift.”  Perhaps  it  was 
merely  naive  psychology,  but  Paul  reached 
foundation  when  he  used  the  phrase.  For 
this  is  the  psychology  of  God — free  gift — free 
in  that  finer  freedom  that  never  denies  its 
source  nor  belies  its  relationships.  “God’s 
whole  scheme  of  redemption  is  an  advertise¬ 
ment  of  his  passion  to  give.”  “God  so  loved 
that  he  gave.”  What  if  the  world  should  daily 
betray  his  attitude? 

2  The  Christ  We  Forget,  by  P.  W.  Wilaon,  Fleming  H.  Revell  Company 
publishers,  New  York  City. 


189 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


But  in  the  domain  of  teaching  lies  the  hope 
for  stewardship.  The  subject  demands  deep 
study.  Unfortunately,  the  material  avail¬ 
able  is  scant  under  the  title  of  stewardship. 
But  studies  in  the  social  gospel,  that  emphasize 
conduct  throughout,  provide  splendid  materials 
with  which  to  teach  stewardship.  The  appeal 
for  the  social  gospel  has  had  to  be  made  to 
many  who  already  had  settled  opinions  of 
Christianity.  What  wonder  that  to  them  the 
message  suggested  the  speech  of  an  alien  who, 
with  socialist  accent,  utters  Christian  shib¬ 
boleths?  Such  barriers  but  rarely  exist  in 
those  who  are  launching  their  lives.  If  we  are 
able  to  convince  them  that  their  consecrations 
must  he  social ,  we  shall  win  for  the  full-orbed 
gospel  of  Christ  the  following  it  deserves. 

Thus  adolescence  is  par  excellence  the  time 
for  the  teaching  of  it.  “There  are  many  fea¬ 
tures  about  the  period  of  youth  that  make  it 
a  time  of  special  opportunity,”  says  Professor 
Tracy,  in  The  Psychology  of  Adolescence .3 
“There  is  abounding  life,  vitality,  and  vigor. 
There  is  a  maximum  of  enthusiastic  interest 
in  things,  and  a  minimum  of  cynicism  and 

3  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  The 
Psychology  oj  Adolescence,  by  Frederick  Tracy. 

190 


TEACHING  STEWARDSHIP 


bitterness.  Hope  is  unclouded,  faith  is  buoyant, 
and  charity  is  broad  and  generous.  The 
intellect  is  easily  persuaded  into  regarding  all 
things  as  products  of  supreme  wisdom  and  all 
events  as  under  the  control  of  supreme  benef¬ 
icence.  Youth  is  by  nature  theistic  and 
idealistic.  .  .  . 

“ The  moral  attitude  is  not  mercenary.  Dis¬ 
interested  devotion  to  others,  and  to  duty  for 
its  own  sake,  can  be  counted  on;  more  than 
in  childhood,  whose  conceptions  are  restricted 
in  area,  complete  in  quality,  and  largely  under 
control  of  the  empirical  ego;  and  more  than  in 
mature  life,  when  the  heart  may  have  become 
chilled  by  contact  with  a  social  order  that  is 
honey -combed  with  injustice  and  cruelty,  when 
altruism  and  idealism  are  found  to  have  but 
little  value  in  the  world’s  markets,  and  when 
the  roseate  dreams  and  visions  of  an  earlier 
age  are  only  too  likely  to  have  faded  into  the 
light  of  common  day.  .  .  . 

4 ‘The  touch  of  living  personality  .  .  .  meets, 
at  this  time,  with  its  readiest  and  warmest 
response.  And  .  .  .  response  to  the  touch  of 
personality  is  the  tap-root  of  religion.  Sub¬ 
stitute  for  all  finite  and  fallible  personalities 

that  of  the  infinitely  good  and  great,  and  in 

191 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


the  response  to  that  you  have  the  essence  of 
religion.  The  heart  in  youth  is  hungry  for 
communion  with  a  personality  that  is  worthy 
of  adoration  and  service,  eager  to  let  itself  go 
out  to  such  a  personality  in  service  and  sacri¬ 
fice.  The  problem  of  the  Christian  teacher 
here  is  not  so  much  to  convince  the  intellect 
of  the  truth  of  certain  abstract  propositions 
about  Christ,  as  to  hold  up  before  the  pupil 
the  exquisite  personality  of  Christ,  as  worthy 
of  the  highest  devotion  and  the  most  complete 
service  that  can  be  rendered.  .  .  . 

“And  so  the  religious  life  .  .  .  means  the 
elimination  of  all  discordance  between  these 
two — the  dominant  life-ideal  on  the  one  side, 
and  the  concept  of  the  Highest  Being  on 
the  other — in  such  a  way  that  the  service  of 
God  and  of  one’s  fellow  men  in  everyday  life 
will  be  the  natural  response,  alike  to  the 
requirements  of  a  consistent  theology  and  to 
the  demands  of  a  moral  imperative.” 

This  excellent  putting  of  the  matter  should 
awaken  all  of  us  to  the  marvelous  opportunity 
for  stewardship  which  adolescence  offers. 

Nor  can  we  neglect  the  child.  From  an 

early  age  the  instinct  of  acquisition  may  be 

seen  in  operation.  Our  very  earliest  training 

192 


TEACHING  STEWARDSHIP 


is  not  alone  important,  but  frequently  deci¬ 
sive: 

“No  change  in  childhood’s  early  day. 

No  storm  that  raged,  no  thought  that  ran. 

But  leaves  its  track  upon  the  clay 
Which  slowly  hardens  into  man.” 

This  is  more  truth  than  poetry.  Here,  to  be 
sure,  the  church  runs  against  an  obstacle 
difficult  to  surmount.  When  a  child  is  born 
and  reared  in  an  acquisitive  atmosphere,  when 
its  ideals  at  home  are  directed  toward  the 
largest  gain  rather  then  the  highest  service, 
how  shall  the  occasional  teaching  of  the  church 
counteract  such  influence?  Thus  the  cycle 
leads  us  back  to  saving  the  parents  in  order 
to  save  the  children. 

And  now,  to  use  the  favorite  colloquialism  of 

one  of  our  bishops  in  the  tangled  moment  of 

a  conference  session:  4 ‘Brethren,  let  us  see 

where  we  are  at.”  We  began  by  noting  that 

there  is  a  revival  of  stewardship.  There  are 

idiosyncrasies  and  misinterpretations,  but  at 

the  heart  of  it  all  there  is  a  determination  to 

seek  the  will  of  God  in  regard  to  property. 

This  is  expressed  in  the  tithe,  which  frequently 

obtains  from  inferior  motives,  and  is  often 

resorted  to  at  the  behest  of  legalism,  but 

193 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


evidences  the  church’s  desire  to  see  the  will 
of  God  done  in  the  earth.  But  if  stewardship 
ends  with  the  tithe  or  with  generosity,  the 
means  has  defeated  the  end,  and  a  good  has 
once  again  been  made  the  enemy  of  the  best. 
There  must  be  an  honest  facing  of  what  life 
is  for.  There  are  those  who  try  to  be  Chris¬ 
tians  with  a  content  view  of  life,  but  only  the 
view  of  life  that  fulfills  the  intent  of  God  can 
hope  to  follow  Christ.  We  see  that  property, 
an  instrument  for  good,  has  been  utilized  for 
evil.  A  Christian’s  private  attitude  toward 
it,  therefore,  is  that  he  may  use  it  only  for 
the  development  of  his  soul  and  the  saving  of 
the  world,  the  honor  of  his  God.  In  business 
his  attitude  is  that  the  will  of  God  and  his  reign 
must  come  to  expression  in  it.  Property,  in 
public  relations,  must  articulate  Christ.  The 
social  order  must  be  Christianized.  The  church, 
which  most  nearly  of  all  institutions  should 
approximate  an  unselfish  life  in  God,  must 
be  first  in  its  sense  of  trusteeship  with  the 
property  it  has.  It  must  be  a  priest  in  the 
realm  of  stewardship.  But  it  must  also  be 
prophet.  It  cannot  rest  content  until  the 
servant  spirit  dominates  all  men.  It  must 

both  practice  and  preach  stewardship. 

194 


“Now  people  brought  children  for  him  to  touch 
them,  and  the  disciples  checked  them;  but  Jesus 
was  angry  when  he  saw  this,  and  he  said  to  them, 
‘Let  the  children  come  to  me,  do  not  stop  them: 
the  Realm  of  God  belongs  to  such  as  these.  I  tell 
you  truly,  whoever  will  not  submit  to  the  Reign 
of  God  like  a  child  will  never  get  into  it  at  all.* 
Then  he  put  his  arms  round  them,  laid  his  hands 
on  them  and  blessed  them.” — The  Gospel  According 
to  Mark. 

“From  the  widows  they  do  not  turn  away  their 
countenance,  and  they  rescue  the  orphan  from  him 
who  does  him  violence,  and  he  who  has  gives  to 
him  who  has  not  without  grudging.  .  .  .  And  if 
there  is  among  them  one  that  is  poor  and  needy, 
and  they  have  not  an  abundance  of  necessaries, 
they  fast  two  or  three  days  that  they  may  supply 
the  needy  with  their  necessary  food.” — Apology  of 
Aristides  (124-140). 

“Our  blood  splashes  upward,  O  goldheaper, 

And  your  purple  shows  your  path! 

But  the  child’s  sob  in  the  silence  curses  deeper 
Than  the  strong  man  in  his  wrath.” 

—Elizabeth  Barrett  Browning. 


196 


CHAPTER  XI 

A  STEWARDSHIP  REVERIE 


I  turned  away  from  my  desk.  I  left  the 
Book  where  I  had  been  reading  in  it.  I  looked 
out  of  the  window  and  I  saw.  I  saw  the  day. 
What  so  dreary  as  when  June  goes  wet?  The 
rain  had  invited  the  wind  to  a  partnership 
of  molestation  and  together  they  played  all 
manner  of  pranks  with  respectable  umbrellas. 
It  was  toward  dusk  and  toilers  were  home¬ 
ward  bound.  They  were  hurrying  to  get  out 
of  the  rain.  Yes,  but  that  is  not  all  of  the 
truth  about  the  day.  That  morning  I  had 
lazily  viewed  the  landscape  o’er — there  is  a 
good  deal  of  landscape  about  a  city  street. 
Three  impressions  sauntered  in:  It  has  rained; 
it  is  raining;  it  will  rain.  Now  I  saw  that  the 
heart  story  of  this  rainy  day  was  not  that 
those  men  should  get  out  of  the  rain,  but  that 
they  went  into  it.  That  folks  go  to  work  in 
the  rain — let  a  poet  sing  about  that  and  have 
a  theme  worthy  of  song.  Why  did  these  folks 

go  into  the  rain?  This  evening  the  answer 

197 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


came  walking  along.  He  was  poorly  clad,  he 
had  neither  overcoat  nor  umbrella,  but  he  had 
a  bundle  of  wood  covered  with  some  burlap 
slung  over  his  shoulder  and  with  it  was  hasten¬ 
ing  home.  In  fancy  I  followed  him.  It  was 
little  more  than  a  hovel  into  which  he  entered, 
but  it  was  home!  An  emaciated  woman — 
for  poverty  shows  so  in  faces  even  though 
there  be  wealth  in  the  heart — greets  him  with 
a  kiss  and  with  some  dry  garments  to  prove 
the  love  of  which  that  kiss  was  the  counter¬ 
sign.  And  arms — baby  arms — were  out¬ 
stretched  for  him.  Why  had  he  gone  into 
the  rain?  Because  he  needed  bread?  Yes,  but 
he  hadn’t  thought  much  of  that.  Because  she 
needed  bread?  Yes,  he  had  thought  of  that 
and  the  thought  clutched  at  his  heart.  But 
to  know  why  he  had  gone  into  the  rain  you 
must  remember  another  thing.  It  was  the 
children’ s  bread  he  had  thought  of  most  and 
his  heart  had  wept  for  that,  for  the  children’s 
bread!  They  had  to  be  fed,  and  it  was  his 
to  feed  them.  The  bravery  of  love  had  driven 
him  into  the  storm  and  made  his  homeward 
walk  a  triumphant  task.  I  know  what  you 
may  be  thinking.  You  may  object  that  most 

folks  do  not  go  into  the  rain  thus  motived 

198 


A  STEWARDSHIP  REVERIE 


consciously.  They  go  from  habit,  from  a 
sense  of  duty,  for  the  love  of  gain.  Do  they? 
No;  many  may;  but  not  a  few  there  be  who 
go  for  the  children’s  bread. 

4 ‘All  life  moving  to  one  measure — 

Daily  bread,  daily  bread — 

Bread  of  life  and  bread  of  labor. 

Bread  of  bitterness  and  sorrow, 

Hand  to  mouth,  and  no  to-morrow, 

Dearth  for  housemate,  death  for  neighbor— 
Yet  when  all  the  babes  are  fed, 

Love,  are  there  not  crumbs  to  treasure?”1 

Then  I  thought  again  of  the  Book  and  to 
it  I  returned.  It  was  the  Syro-Phcenician 
woman  I  had  been  reading  about.  And  I 
wondered  if  it  rained  that  day  when  she  came 
to  see  Jesus  about  her  child.  Be  assured  of 
this.  If  there  was  no  storm  outside,  there 
was  a  storm  inside.  She  walked  with  a  cloud 
on  her  heart.  The  sky  under  which  she  trod 
was  dark  and  threatening.  Her  child  was 
stricken  with  lunacy.  Here  was  one  woman 
who  stood  ready  to  admit  that  there  was 
something  the  matter  with  her  child.  She 
came  to  Jesus  just  at  a  time  when  Jesus  was 


1  “Daily  Bread,’’  Wilson  Wilfred  Gibson,  The  Macmillan  Company. 

199 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


trying  to  get  away  from  people  and  be  alone 
with  his  disciples  a  while.  Mark’s  stately  and 
suggestive  record  says  that  he  “entered  into 
an  house,  and  would  have  no  man  know  it; 
and  he  could  not  be  hid.  For  a  certain  woman, 
whose  little  daughter  had  an  unclean  spirit, 
heard  of  him,  and  came  and  fell  at  his  feet.  .  .  . 
And  she  besought  him  that  he  would  cast 
forth  the  devil  out  of  her  daughter.”2  You 
respect  that  mother,  don’t  you?  You  would 
respect  her  all  the  more  if  you  knew  she  had 
come  through  the  rain!  Of  this  you  may  be 
certain:  She  did  not  consult  the  weather.  She 
did  not  wait  until  it  was  a  nice  day  to  go  out. 
She  was  after  something  for  her  child,  just 
like  that  man  I  saw  in  the  rain,  just  like  you 
at  the  heart  of  your  task.  She  came  not  about 
bread,  but  about  mind.  The  trouble  with 
that  child  was  that  it  had  not  intelligence  to 
understand;  the  tragedy  with  that  child  was 
that  it  had  not  sense  enough  to  sense  love. 
That  makes  lunacy  so  vexing — lunacy  knows 
not  love.  Her  daughter  was  grievously  vexed 
with  a  devil.  So  she  came  all  the  way  to  see 
Jesus  and  perhaps  she  came  through  the  rain. 
What  a  dismal  reception  she  got!  “He  an- 


2  Authorized  Version. 


200 


A  STEWARDSHIP  REVERIE 


swered  her  not  a  word.”  What  a  chill  that 
silence  sent  to  her  heart!  Will  she  speak  again? 
O,  yes;  folks  do  not  let  a  chill  stand  in  the 
way  of  the  children’s  bread — did  I  not  see  it 
this  rainy  day? — folks  are  not  rebuffed  by  a 
chill  when  they  speak  for  the  sake  of  love. 
She  continued  her  request  for  help.  It  bothered 
the  disciples.  Do  you  remember  those  mothers 
with  their  babies?  The  idea  of  bringing  babies 
where  Jesus  was!  Now,  here  was  another 
mother  ranting  about  another  child!  Would 
it  never  let  up?  John  Oxenham  sings:  “Blessed 
are  the  childless,  loving  children  still.  Theirs 
shall  be  a  mightier  family,  Even  as  the  stars 
of  heaven.”  Mothers  and  children,  especially 
children,  bothered  the  disciples.  Came  a  time 
when  they  no  longer  did.  When  the  last  of 
them — who  had  been  the  youngest — spoke 
his  last  words  to  his  followers  he  is  reported  to 
have  called  them,  as  had  been  his  wont,  “little 
children.”  Perhaps  the  reason  he  said  that 
so  often  and  so  tenderly  was  because  he  remem¬ 
bered  how  childish  he  and  his  fellows  had  been 
about  children  in  the  long  ago.  John  became 
great  when  he  learned  the  value  of  a  child.  This 
Syro-Phoenician  woman — this  Syro-Phoenician 

mother — had  learned  that.  She  belonged  to 

201 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


that  time-long  fraternity  of  which  that  man 
was  a  member  whom  I  saw  out  there  in  the 
rain  with  some  wood  to  carry  home.  It  is  a 
high  art  in  which  she  was  versed.  “And  his 
disciples  came  and  besought  him  saying,  Send 
her  away;  for  she  crieth  after  us.”  “But  he 
answered  and  said” — and  was  it  something 
cheering  and  heartening  he  said?  Was  it 
some  word  of  healing  to  assuage  her  agony? 
But  he  answered  and  said  not  to  her  but  to 
them :  “I  was  not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep 
of  the  house  of  Israel.”  Is  there  a  possibility 
of  irony  in  these  words?  The  lost  sheep  of 
Israel  needed  to  be  found;  not  so  a  mother 
heart  that  found  its  way  to  him.  Who  knows? 
But  what  he  said  to  them  was  apparently  said 
against  her!  But  she  is  undaunted  still.  Man, 
you  must  summon  a  hurricane  to  stay  a  love 
like  that.  You  must  get  you  the  blast  of 
Gabriel’s  trump  before  you  can  still  her  cry. 
“She  came”  as  though  she  had  not  come  far 
enough;  “she  came  and  worshiped  and  said, 
Lord,  help  me!”  And  he  answered  and  said 
to  her,  or  was  it  to  them? — “It  is  not  meet 
to  take  the  children’s  bread  and  cast  it  to  the 
dogs.”  It  has  been  said  that  this  that  he  said 

was  the  most  heartless  of  all  his  sayings.  It 

202 


A  STEWARDSHIP  REVERIE 


has  been  said  that  to  say  these  words  was 
high-handed  cruelty.  Now,  doesn’t  it  sound 
that  way?  John  Bunyan,  before  going  to 
Bedford  Jail,  kissed  the  upturned  face  of  his 
sightless  girl  and  said:  “Poor  child!  how  hard 
it  is  like  to  go  with  thee  in  this  world!  Thou 
must  be  beaten;  must  suffer  hunger,  cold,  and 
nakedness;  and  yet  I  cannot  endure  that  even 
the  wind  should  blow  upon  thee.”  If  this  is 
a  fair  sample  of  a  father’s  love,  can  it  be  that 
Christ  was  unmoved  of  a  mother’s  love? 

These  words  have  been  a  thorn  in  the  flesh 
of  the  expositors.  That  he  should  have  said 
this  merely  to  test  her  faith  seems  by  far  too 
cold-hearted  to  most  of  them.  They  sense 
that  it  cannot  have  been  humor  in  the  face 
of  need.  Our  Lord  “called  nothing  common 
or  unclean.”  But  they  all  unite  in  saying — 
though  they  know  not  that  they  unite — that 
his  compassion  here  struggled  with  his  con¬ 
viction.  And  compassion  won.  His  task  lay 
with  the  Jews,  and  his  answer  to  this  call  of 
need  was  the  by-product  of  a  soul  so  big  that 
it  cannot  be  bounded  by  any  one  task.  There 
are  many  other  things  that  the  expositors  say, 
but  there  is  one  point  they  seldom  emphasize. 

That  is  this:  For  whatever  reason  Christ  said 

203 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


this,  what  he  said  was  true!  And  in  our  har- 
monizing-haste  we  have  seldom  thought  of 
this!  Let  it  first  be  said  that  Christ  meant 
here  no  disrespect  to  dogs!  In  the  story  of 
Lazarus  and  Dives  Jesus  showed  how  much  a 
dog  may  excel  a  man.  Jesus,  like  all  good 
thinkers,  had  a  wholesome  respect  for  a  dog. 
“I  do  not  keep  a  dog,”  says  Boreham,  the 
essayist.  “It  is  too  humiliating.  A  man 
cannot  possibly  enjoy  the  companionship  of  a 
dog  and  maintain  his  self-respect.”  Masefield, 
the  modern  poet,  sings  sweet  songs  of  the  dog. 
Saul  Kane,  in  The  Everlasting  Mercy ,  has 
known 

“Those  poor  lonely  ones  who  find 
Dogs  more  mild  than  human  kind. 

For  dogs,  I  said,  are  nobles  born  .  .  . 

I’ve  known  dogs  to  leave  their  dinner, 

Nosing  a  kind  heart  in  a  sinner. 

Poor  old  Crafty  wagged  his  tail 
The  day  I  first  came  home  from  jail. 

When  all  my  folks,  so  primly  clad. 

Glowered  back  and  thought  me  mad. 

And  muttered  how  they’d  been  respected, 
While  I  was  what  they’d  all  expected. 

(I’ve  thought  of  that  old  dog  for  years, 

And  of  how  near  I  come  to  tears).”3 

3  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  Collected 
Poems,  by  John  Masefield. 


204 


A  STEWARDSHIP  REVERIE 


“It  is  not  meat  to  take  the  children’s  bread 
and  cast  it  to  the  dogs.”  It  is  not  right  to 
use  resources  for  children  for  inferior  purposes! 
But  the  world  is  doing  just  this.  Resources 
for  children!  How  Christ  was  concerned  with 
the  child.  “Permit  them  to  come,”  “Of  such 
is  the  Realm  of  God,”  “Be  like  them,”  “If 
ye  offend  one  of  these  little  ones.”  Could 
language  convey  his  idea  with  greater  clarity? 
We  must  put  the  child  in  the  midst;  the  child 
is  our  business;  the  child  must  be  the  business 
of  the  business  world;  all  other  business  must 
be  aligned  with  it.  And  just  now  it  is  hard 
going  for  children;  there  are  ominous  clouds; 
there  are  storms  not  of  their  making  threaten¬ 
ing  in  the  skies.  Jesus  calls  us  to  make  the 
child  our  criterion!  Incidentally,  we  might 
also  have  the  mother  in  mind: 

“To  make  him  plump  she  starved  her  body  thin. 

And  he,  he  ate  the  food,  and  never  knew. 

He  laughed  and  played  as  little  children  do.”4 

But  this  aside.  It  is  the  child’s  need  that 
commands  Christ’s  power.  It  is  the  child’s 
need  that  comes  to  summon  our  lives.  Until 
business  is  salvation,  the  biggest  business  in 
the  world  is  the  business  of  salvation.  And 


4  Reprinted  by  permission  of  The  Macmillan  Company,  from  Collected 
Poems,  by  John  Masefield. 

205 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


when  we  save  the  child,  we  Christianize  human¬ 
ity  at  its  base. 

I  once  visited  a  home  where  poverty  and 
filth  tried  to  outdo  each  other.  When  I 
came  in,  the  little  girl  set  up  a  pitiful  cry. 
The  mother,  intending  I  should  not  hear  the 
whisper  I  heard  well,  said  to  the  child,  “That 
man  ain’t  yer  papa;  he  won’t  hurt!”  Yet 
that  child,  cowering  in  fear  and  covered  with 
filth,  seen  through  the  eyes  of  Jesus  surpasses 
in  worth  the  realty  value  of  the  city  in  which 
she  lives!  Within  a  stone’s  throw  factories 
hummed;  only  a  few  days  earlier  a  prosperous 
layman  said:  “Pastor,  business  is  good!”  I 
wonder  if  Christ  would  agree?  Good;  business 
good!  Well,  “in  the  day  of  Jesus  Christ,” 
this  is  just  what  it  will  be! 

Sickening  sentimentalism;  infantile  idealism; 
impractical  and  foolish? 

“Then  Christ  sought  out  an  artisan, 

A  low-browed,  stunted,  haggard  man. 

And  a  motherless  girl,  whose  fingers  thin. 
Pushed  from  her  faintly  want  and  sin. 

“These  set  he  in  the  midst  of  them. 

And  as  they  drew  back  their  garment-hem 
Por  fear  of  defilement,  ‘Lo,  here,’  said  he, 

‘The  images  ye  have  made  of  me!’  ” 

206 


A  STEWARDSHIP  REVERIE 


But  if  we  care  for  what  Jesus  thinks  a  little 
child  must  lead  us  to  the  dwelling  place  of 
light.  The  question  is,  Do  we  care?  Does 
business  make  it  possible  for  childhood  to 
come  to  its  best?  Does  it  strive  to  furnish 
them  in  body,  mind  and  soul?  Ambassadors 
to  childhood,  does  business  make  us  that?  Or 
do  we  still  sacrifice  children  on  the  bloody 
shrine  of  Mammon?  Perhaps  Jesus  was  right 
after  all.  We  must  put  the  child  in  the  midst. 
Business  must  serve  the  children  of  God,  or  it 
does  not  serve  him  at  all. 


207 


“And  I  remember  still 
The  words,  and  from  whence  they  came, 
Not  he  that  repeateth  the  name 
But  he  that  doeth  the  will. 

And  him  evermore  I  behold 
Walking  in  Galilee, 

Through  the  cornfield’s  waving  gold 
By  the  shores  of  the  Beautiful  Sea. 

And  that  voice  soundeth  on 
From  the  centuries  that  are  gone 
To  the  centuries  that  shall  be. 

From  all  vain  pomps  and  shows. 

From  the  pride  that  overflows 

% 

Poor,  sad  humanity 
Through  all  the  dust  and  heat 
Turns  back  with  bleeding  feet 
By  the  weary  round  it  came. 

Unto  the  simple  thought. 

By  the  great  Master  taught. 

And  that  remaineth  still, 

Not  he  that  repeateth  the  name 
But  he  that  doeth  the  will.” 


208 


APPENDIX 
RELATIVE  TO  TITHE 

The  Schaff-Herzog  Encyclopedia  of  Religion 
and  Knowledge:1 

“The  history  among  the  Hebrews  is  far 
from  clear;  two  situations  appear,  that  in 
Deuteronomy  and  that  in  P.  .  .  .  Deut.  14.  22 
sqq.  requires  a  tithing  of  agricultural  products 
and  of  the  products  of  pastoral  life,  to  be 
devoted  to  a  communal  meal  at  the  central 
sanctuary.  In  case  the  home  was  too  distant 
the  tithe  might  be  commuted  and  material 
for  the  meal  purchased  at  the  sanctuary.  The 
purpose  of  the  tithe  in  this  case  was  not  the 
support  of  the  services  at  the  Temple,  but  a 
joyous  meal  of  the  agriculturist  and  his  estab¬ 
lishment  with  the  Levites  of  his  locality,  the 
latter  being  included  because  they  had  no 
landed  possessions.  It  did  not  go  to  the  priests 
or  temple  officers.  Purity  of  the  participants 
was  required.  Deut.  14.  28-29 ,  26.  12-1 5 
require  that  in  the  third  year  the  tithe  shall 

1  Funk  &  Wagnalls  Company,  publishers. 

209 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


be  deposited  at  the  home  (not  at  the  sanc¬ 
tuary)  for  the  benefit  of  the  Levite,  stranger, 
fatherless,  and  widow;  this  is  not  a  second 
tithing  but  a  special  employment  of  the  tithe 
for  charitable  purposes.  It  may  have  been  a 
sort  of  compensation  for  the  abolition  of  the 
early  public  offering  and  meal  of  which  the 
needy  partook.  Of  a  second  tithing  expressly 
for  the  Levites  Deuteronomy  knows  nothing. 
The  relation  of  the  tithe  to  the  offering  of 
first-fruits  in  Deut.  is  not  clear;  possibly  the 
two  are  identical,  as  it  seems  unlikely  that 
each  generation  of  the  herd  should  be  sub¬ 
jected  to  a  double  tax,  and  Deut.  26.  1-15 
puts  first-fruits  and  the  tithe  in  close  con¬ 
nection.  In  this  case  the  basket  of  first-fruits 
brought  to  the  priest  is  simply  a  part  of  the 
tithe  which  is  devoted  as  a  whole  to  the  joyous 
meal.  Against  this  Deut.  18.  4  is  no  objec¬ 
tion,  even  as  a  later  insertion.  And  with  this 
conception  many  difficulties  vanish.  ‘Tithe’ 
becomes  an  expression  for  the  entire  offering 
of  first  fruits,  over  which  a  sort  of  control  is 
introduced  (by  supplementary  provisions).  The 
entire  law  omits  mention  of  the  tithe,  then, 
because  it  is  identical  with  the  offering  of 

first-fruits.  The  treatment  of  the  tithe  in  P 

210 


.  APPENDIX 


must  be  considered  an  extension  of  the  situation 
in  Deuteronomy.  Num.  18.  £6-28  gives  the 
whole  tithe  to  the  Levites,  and  this  was  again 
tithed  for  the  Aaronites  (Neh.  10.  38).  Lev. 
£7.  31-33  requires  the  addition  of  a  fifth  of 
the  tithe  of  the  first-fruits  when  it  is  com¬ 
muted,  and  aims  to  procure  honesty  in  pay¬ 
ment  of  tithes  of  cattle.  This  law  is  first  men¬ 
tioned  in  £  Chron.  31.  5-6;  it  is  not  found  in 
Neh.  10  nor  Mai.  3,  hence  it  is  deduced  that 
it  arose  between  the  time  of  Nehemiah,  and 
that  of  the  Chronicler.  In  attempting  to 
reconcile  P  and  D.  .  .  .  some  have  thought 
that  D  had  in  view  a  second  tenth,  which 
came  to  light  first  after  the  tenth  of  the  tithe 
had  been  deducted.  .  .  .  Then  later  practice 
(Tob.  1.  6-8)  seems  to  show  the  tithes  of  P 
and  D  both  claimed  by  the  Levites.  Theo¬ 
retically  there  were  three  tithes,  according  to 
P  for  the  Levites,  according  to  D  for  the 
public  meal,  and  that  each  third  year  for  the 
poor.  The  first  accrued  wholly  to  the  Levites 
and  covered  all  that  came  from  the  earth 
(cf.  Matt.  £3.  £3);  the  second  was  for  the 
officers’  meal,  though  Philo  gives  it  to  the 
Levites,  and  so  raises  the  question  whether 

the  twofold  or  threefold  tithing  was  merely 

211 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


theoretical.  How  the  system  worked  out  is 
not  known.  From  2  Chron.  31.  4  it  has  been 
inferred  that  till  the  time  of  Hezekiah  the 
tithes  were  too  small  for  the  support  of  the 
personnel  of  the  cultus,  and  from  Deut.  12.  17 
a  misuse  of  the  tithes  is  deduced  (cf.  Neh. 
13.  5  sqq.;  Mai.  3.  8).  But  there  is  no  report 
of  the  actual  exactions  of  both  the  tithes  of 
P  and  D,  and  Josephus  mentions  only  the 
Levitical  tenth  which  was  converted  into  money 
on  the  spot  (Life,  XII,  15);  so  at  the  second 
temple  a  second  tithe  does  not  appear.  But 
the  Jews  who  were  true  to  the  law  seem  to  have 
recognized  loyally  their  duty  in  the  matter  of 
tithes  (Ecclus.  XXXV,  11;  1  Macc.  Ill,  49; 
cf.  Matt.  23.  23) r 

S.  R.  Driver,  “Deuteronomy,”  International 
Critical  Commentary,1  p.  169. 

“The  Deuteronomic  law  of  tithe  is,  however, 
in  serious,  and  indeed  irreconcilable,  conflict 
with  the  law  of  P  on  the  subject.  .  .  .  The 
data  at  our  disposal  do  not  enable  us  to  write 
a  history  of  the  Hebrew  tithe.” 

Encyclopedia  of  Religion  and  Ethics  (Ed. 
James  Hastings):2 

1  Charles  Scribner’s  Sons,  publishers. 

*  Ibid. 


212 


APPENDIX 


“Among  the  Hebrews  the  relation  of  tithes 
to  first-fruits  is  complicated,  and  opinions  differ 
as  to  whether  they  were  distinct  or  not.  First- 
fruits  would  naturally  vary  in  quantity.  Tithe 
expresses  more  or  less  a  fixed  proportion. 
Perhaps  the  tithe  represents  first-fruits  made 
•systematic,  or  different  names  may  have  been 
favored  at  different  times  and  in  different 
localities.  The  tithe  is  called  ‘an  heave  offer¬ 
ing’  in  Num.  18.  24,  but  the  two  are  apparently 
separate  in  Deut.  12.  6ff.  In  the  later  legis¬ 
lation  first-fruits  and  tithes  appear  to  be  dis¬ 
tinguished.  The  tithe,  which  is  not  men¬ 
tioned  in  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  appears 
first  in  the  Northern  Kingdom  in  the  time  of 
Jereboam  II,  as  the  material  given  for  a  feast 
at  the  sanctuary — though  the  feast  was  one 
for  the  rich  at  the  expense  of  the  poor.  .  .  . 
The  tithe  in  the  Deuteronomic  code  is  not  a 
forced  tribute.  ...  It  was  not  a  direct  due 
for  the  priesthood  or  for  public  religious  serv¬ 
ices.  ...  Is  the  third  year’s  tithe  additional  to 
the  tithe  given  each  year,  or  is  it  a  special 
form  of  treating  tithe  in  the  third  year?  Here 
again  opinions  differ.” 

Dictionary  of  the  Bible  (Ed.  James  Hastings): 

“In  the  O.  T.  two  ideas  lie  at  the  root  of 

213 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


the  custom;  the  more  antique — apart  from  its 
position  in  the  Bible — is  that  which  regards 
the  offering  of  a  tenth  to  the  Deity  as  his 
due,  owing  to  his  being  the  Supreme  Owner 
of  the  land  and  all  that  it  brings  forth,  or 
that  feeds  upon  it  (Lev.  27.  30-33);  here  the 
underlying  thought  is  that  of  propitiation — 
if  the  Supreme  Owner  does  not  receive  his 
due,  his  blessing  will  be  wanting  another  year. 
The  other  idea,  which  is  obviously  a  later 
one,  is  that  of  thankfulness  for  the  blessings 
received  (Gen.  28.  20-22);  the  tithes  were 
given  in  recognition  of  what  the  Giver  of  all 
things  had  accorded  to  his  worshipers.  Among 
the  Israelites  this  ancient  custom  was  taken 
advantage  of  by  the  Levitical  priesthood,  who, 
as  those  employed  in  the  sanctuary  of  Jahweh, 
claimed  for  themselves  on  behalf  of  him,  a 
tithe  of  ail.” 

The  Encyclopedia  Britannica : 

“On  the  religious  side  the  oldest  laws  (e.g. 
Exod.  34.  26)  speak  of  bringing  the  first  fruits 
of  the  land  to  the  house  of  Yahweh.  In  the 
8th  century  the  term  ‘tithe’  was  used  in  Israel 
of  religious  dues  (Amos  4.  4;  Gen.  28.  22),  and 
in  the  7th  century  Deuteronomic  legislation  the 

word  is  often  found.  In  Deuteronomy  the 

214 


APPENDIX 


new  point  emphasized  is  not  that  tithes  must 
be  paid,  but  that  they  must  be  consumed  at 
the  central,  instead  of  a  local  sanctuary.  .  .  . 
Such  a  tithe  is  still  nothing  more  than  the 
old  offering  of  ‘firstfruits’  .  .  .  and  it  was  only 
natural  that  as  time  went  on  there  should  be 
some  fixed  standard  of  the  due  amount  of 
the  annual  sacred  tribute.  The  establishment 
of  such  a  standard  does  not  necessarily  imply 
that  full  payment  was  exacted.  .  .  .  The  priests 
of  the  sanctuaries  had  of  old  a  share  in  the 
sacrificial  feasts,  and  among  those  who  are 
to  share  in  the  triennial  tithe  Deuteronomy 
includes  the  Levites,  i.e.,  the  priests  of  the 
local  sanctuaries  who  had  lost  their  old  per¬ 
quisites  by  the  centralization  of  worship.  In 
Ezekiel  as  in  the  Law  of  Holiness  there  is  no 
mention  of  tithes;  he  proposes  to  support  all 
public  worship  from  the  proceeds  of  a  general 
tax  (45.  13)  levied  by  the  prince,  the  old  first- 
fruits  being  allotted  to  the  priests.  In  the 
Persian  period  the  tithe  was  converted  to  the 
use  of  the  Temple  (Mai.  3.  8-10).  As  Malachi 
speaks  in  Deuteronomic  phrase  of  The  whole 
tithe,’  the  payment  to  the  Levites  (now 
subordinate  ministers  of  the  Temple)  was 

perhaps  still  only  triennial;  and  if  even  this 

215 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 

was  difficult  to  collect,  we  may  be  sure  that 
the  minor  sacrificial  tithe  had  very  nearly 
disappeared.  .  .  .  The  last  change  in  the  system 
was  the  appropriation  of  the  Levitical  tithe  by 
the  priests.” 

See  further:  Peake’s  Commentary  on  the 
Bible;  A  Dictionary  of  Religion  and  Ethics , 
Shailer  Mathews  and  Gerald  B.  Smith. 


216 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Of  the  books  used  in  the  preparation  of 
these  chapters,  the  author  is  most  deeply 
indebted  to: 

Francis  J.  McConnell,  Church  Finance  and 
Social  Ethics. 

R.  H.  Tawney,  The  Acquisitive  Society . 

Other  books  used  are: 

Charles  A.  Beard,  The  Economic  Basis  of 
Politics. 

Borden  P.  Bowne,  Principles  of  Ethics. 

James  Bryce,  International  Relations. 

Edwin  Grant  Conklin,  The  Direction  of  Hu¬ 
man  Evolution. 

George  Cross,  Creative  Christianity. 

S.  R.  Driver,  Deuteronomy . 

Edward  S.  Drown,  The  Creative  Christ. 

Charles  A.  Ell  wood,  The  Reconstruction  of 
Religion. 

Glenn  Frank,  The  Politics  of  Industry. 

Charles  A.  Gardner,  The  Ethics  of  Jesus  and 
Social  Progress. 

Alfred  E.  Garvie,  The  Purpose  of  God  in 
Christ. 


217 


DEEPER  MEANING  OF  STEWARDSHIP 


T.  R.  Glover,  The  Jesus  of  History. 

Charles  E.  Gore,  Property,  Its  Duties  and 
Rights. 

George  B.  Gray,  A  Critical  Introduction  to 
the  Old  Testament. 

L.  T.  Hobhouse,  The  Rational  Good. 

Benjamin  Kidd,  The  Science  of  Power. 

Francis  J.  McConnell,  Public  Opinion  and 
Theology. 

James  Moffatt,  The  Theology  of  the  Gospels. 

Walter  Rauschenbusch,  A  Theology  for  the 
Social  Gospel. 

Frederick  Tracy,  The  Psychology  of  Adoles¬ 
cence, 


218 


\ 


i 


1 

- 

.  -  .  V  '•  -  V"  ■'  .  ■  !  .  J 


■  i  ...  /-’i  <  ••  - 


-  ■-  ■■  '  ■ 


■ 


N  .  -  z 

^  •  X  ,  w  'A  ■.!■'{  •  "& 


7/J  4  & 

(j  J 

.  •  .  I 


"  /-  /  -  t",  .  gl 

■'  "  r  '■  /  /<  '  '  he  t': 


s'”S ,  L'-  i  .  &  ■  >•<: 


■~ »■  ■ 3 ’  •  >•  ■**  ■  ^  w  .  /  ,  'j  ~~/ 


iW  t i . 


^  ,  'l  !  ■■  />'(  .  *, 


’  j  *■ —  ■  / ,~~t  * 

•  '  ,-  • 


•  ;>  3 


y?-  * 


:  j 


V?  Q-^t  ^ 

f"*  *T 

/*&  yf 

^:..  C-tU^C.-i  V  yl.  /  /'*ov<:  '/t  'J-.  /'s^C  y  ■'  /&■  J?  1 


■.  ■  ;v  -I 


' 


^  v*  ^  /d\As^v»  / 

’"•  rt-U  v  J2-~f.&iv\,  fUtft /^hr^i  Vu  yy  :  -••'.  c  y£<  V-~-v^y  ^ 


/ 


"  "  /W 


■ 


J> 


/jf£  ^eT?  .  ;/s>-  "  *»'  '~tA  Vi- 

(WCrt/ *  ^  -v  -  >  d  •  /v  /,f '  ■  t 


Princeton 

'  leoloc  ical  Seminaj 

•y  Libraries 

1  10 

12  01234 

9553 

Date  Due 

'  ■  T  ’aq 

lllfe— nW»N*— f  tfuS 

'■fa: — /•  r  - - 

*  r  *1 

Hfes'v  *' 

y V  v  i. . ,  '  < 

w  . 

/  3  <i  741 

t  1  a  minimiumiT""^**11*^ 

ip 

mm*****0* 

\  t'  (  'i  *  o  ?#>  jHPV* 

,aftlHin|i  gg ■§ 

m 

■v  ■.» 

0mm^ 

■0» 

00  i  - 

m 

Un  n  i 

/ 

Tit-  7  JL  3  * 

/ 

•  / 

/ 

<i> 

/ 

••  ‘K 


«•>  #  , 


